PCN issued after 14 days but issuer rejects

amalething03

Hello,

Firstly I'd like to thank the people who contribute to this board, after a bit of reading around this and the BPA code of practice, I'm even more confused than before

I received a PCN in the post from nForce Parking Management advising on 22 July that the 'driver of this vehicle' breach the terms and conditions by 'Ticket Expired'. The notice was issued on 7 August. No fine on the windscreen was issued.

The ticket was either late being purchasd due to neither machine not accepting the change meaning a trek across town to get a bank card, or it was simply late. Either way, the ticket had expired.

I looked into it straight away on this board, noting the BPA code of practice 2018 schedule 4 section 9, states that for the keeper liability to apply, the keeper must receive a notice to keeper with 14 days. Believing the notice wasn't valid since 16 days had passed, returning from holiday I forgot to doing anything about it.

I've since received a debt recovery letter. I contacted nForce stating the BPA code of practice and received the following email.
"The notice does not need to be served within 14 days as POFA was not stated in the charge therefore it can be served within a 7 month period after the incident date (BPA code of practice)." - nForce.


I've read up on Keeper Liability and POFA (ww.parkingfine-appeals.co.uk/keeper-liability-explained/). I believe since they haven't stated the driver and I haven't mentioned who the driver was, they should have issued the notice by 6 August.

For the record, I'm not sure who the driver was at the time.

Thank you for any advise you can offer, it's all really appreciated.

Fruitcake

Edit your post to change the bit about the person who might have been late buying a second ticket. It implies the identity of the driver.

Have you appealed to the PPC at all? If not the keeper should send a late appeal using the blue template and add a one liner that the NTK was received too late for keeper liability to apply so they should cancel now to save themselves money.

With an alleged date of contravention of the 22nd July being day zero, the NTK should have arrived by the 5th of August for keeper liability to apply.

NForce look like a small tin-pot outfit. No website, and a self ticketing operation.

Don't forget to complain to your MP about this unregulated scam.

monkeez

Fruitcake wrote: »

Edit your post to change the bit about the person who might have been late buying a second ticket. It implies the identity of the driver.



Have you appealed to the PPC at all? If not the keeper should send a late appeal using the blue template and add a on liner that the NTK was received too late for keeper liability to apply. They should cancel now to save themselves money.

The NTK PCN i received through the post from UKCPM was 30 days from the 'offence' date. I appealed but it got rejected.

The_Deep

Tin pot is probably right. They registered with CH last month. £100 company which pay commission. Are they members of an ATA I wonder?

Get your MP on the case as nine times out of ten of these tickets are scams.

Parliament is well aware of the MO of these private parking companies, many of whom are former clampers, and on 15th March 2019 a Bill was enacted to curb the excesses of these shysters. Codes of Practice are being drawn up, an independent appeals service will be set up, and access to the DVLA's date base more rigorously policed, persistent offenders denied access to the DVLA database and unable to operate.

Hopefully life will become impossible for the worst of these scammers, but until this is done you should still complain to your MP, citing the new legislation.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/8/contents/enacted

Just as the clampers were finally closed down, so hopefully will many of these Private Parking Companies

amalething03

Thank you Fruitcake for the input. I've read through the Blue Template. However I'm not sure which points I should address since I assume only the issue date is relevant. At the end of the blue template it mentions Keeper Liability:

"If the NTK arrives late, this does not make the PCN 'void' but it means there is 'no keeper liability' possible."


Where the PPC replied, "The notice does not need to be served within 14 days as POFA was not stated in the charge therefore it can be served within a 7 month period after the incident date". Can I assume this is nonsense as Keeper Liability applies here?



Monkeez, since you were beyond the 28 days for appeal. Who did you appeal to? Did you use a modified version of the Blue Template also?



Thank you both, again.

monkeez

There was no mention on POFA on the PCN i got.
I appealed directly to UKCPM as the keeper using the blue template and added a bit at the bottom saying the NTK/PCN didnt comply with POFA.

Fruitcake

amalething03 wrote: »

Thank you Fruitcake for the input. I've read through the Blue Template. However I'm not sure which points I should address since I assume only the issue date is relevant. At the end of the blue template it mentions Keeper Liability:

"If the NTK arrives late, this does not make the PCN 'void' but it means there is 'no keeper liability' possible."


Where the PPC replied, "The notice does not need to be served within 14 days as POFA was not stated in the charge therefore it can be served within a 7 month period after the incident date". Can I assume this is nonsense as Keeper Liability applies here?



Monkeez, since you were beyond the 28 days for appeal. Who did you appeal to? Did you use a modified version of the Blue Template also?



Thank you both, again.

However I'm not sure which points I should address since I assume only the issue date is relevant.

From my previous post,

"the keeper should send a late appeal using the blue template and add a one liner that the NTK was received too late for keeper liability to apply so they should cancel now to save themselves money".

Send it unaltered except the additional one liner, from the keeper. If you start mucking about with a one size fits all template you run the risk of it no longer fitting your case, and blowing your toes off by revealing the driver's identity.

The NTK is non PoFA complaint irrespective what their old boys club might say. However, all that goes out the window if the driver's identity is known.

Can I assume this is nonsense as Keeper Liability applies here?
No, keeper liability does NOT apply.

amalething03

Sorry Fruitcake, your right, you did say add a one-liner. I just caught up reading the template and completely forgot.


I understand the whole blue template is best. Is this to be sent to the PPC or the debt recovery company?
Should I request a POPLA code?


Extracting from another thread, would this be what you suggest?

Your Notice to Keeper is not compliant with Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, and thus you cannot pursue me as the keeper. You must therefore cancel the charge, or offer me a POPLA code.

Thank you very much

Redx

Just do what fruitcake said , nothing else , appealing as keeper to the PPC that issued the PCN

No blabbing about who was driving

Post #4 of the newbies thread tells people to ignore debt collectors

POFA is not mandatory , we wish it was , but it's not

Yes , add that statement to the blue text template

amalething03

The NTK is non PoFA complaint irrespective what their old boys club might say. However, all that goes out the window if the driver's identity is known.

Can I assume this is nonsense as Keeper Liability applies here?
No, keeper liability does NOT apply.

I think the confusion is thinking it's either Keeper Liability OR PoFA. It's simply non PoFA compliant. I should read up more on this.


You're surely pulling your hair out with me this thread but I do appreciate you time. I'm just find this more complicated than it really is.

amalething03

Redx wrote: »

Post #4 of the newbies thread tells people to ignore debt collectors

POFA is not mandatory , we wish it was , but it's not

Thank you, now reading "'IGNORE THE DEBT COLLECTORS' STAGE"