Total Car Parks & Debt recovery plus

P25522

I have received an email back from BPA with instruction to email an appeal of why the ticket was wrongfully issued and the reasons for an overstay to TCP - they will then consider whether they will accept this appeal or not.
I have taken the draft from the newbies sticky and added a little to it in relation to specifically what has been asked for.
critique's please & thank you!

Re PTC number:

I dispute your 'parking charge', as the keeper of the vehicle. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a formal complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner and to my MP.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving, and no assumptions can be drawn. Since your PCN is a vague template, I require ALL photos taken and an explanation of the allegation and your evidence, i.e.:

- If the allegation concerns a PDT machine, the data supplied in response to this appeal must include the record of payments made - showing partial VRNs - and an explanation of the reason for the PCN, because your Notice does not explain it.

- If the allegation involves an alleged overstay of minutes, your evidence must include the actual grace period agreed by the landowner. If you fail to evidence the actual grace period that applies at this site or suggest that only one period applies, this will be disregarded as an attempt to mislead. In the absence of evidence, it will be reasonably taken to be a minimum of twenty minutes (ten on arrival and ten after parking time) in accordance with the official BPA article by Kelvin Reynolds about 'observation periods' on arrival being additional and separate to a 'grace period' at the end.

- in all cases, you must include a close up actual photograph of the sign you contend was at the location on the material date.

Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, paragraph 9 the notice to keeper must

“(a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;
(b)inform the keeper that the driver is required to pay parking charges in respect of the specified period of parking and that the parking charges have not been paid in full;
(c) describe the parking charges due from the driver as at the end of that period, the circumstances in which the requirement to pay them arose (including the means by which the requirement was brought to the attention of drivers) and the other facts that made them payable;
(d)specify the total amount of those parking charges that are unpaid, as at a time which is—
(i)specified in the notice; and
(ii)no later than the end of the day before the day on which the notice is either sent by post or, as the case may be, handed to or left at a current address for service for the keeper (see sub-paragraph (4));
Some of these have been met, however, there has been no specification of the parking charges that have been unpaid nor a full explanation of the circumstances for which they arose. The notice only details the cost of the parking ticket charge. There has only been ANPR Photograph (without a time or date stamp as described in Code 20 of the BPA code of conduct)

The Notice to keeper was not received until the 29th October and thus, there was never any possibility of the initial discount being available to the keeper.
Regarding code 23 of the BPA code of conduct – Only two letters have been received from Total Car Parks before referring the matter to a debt recovery firm. A “Notice in breach of parking conditions” (taken as notice to keeper) sent 6 days after the alleged unauthorised event followed 14 days later by a “Final Warning”. According to code 23, a notification letter should have been sent at day 28 stating that the keeper is now liable to pay the charge. This has not been received. The code also states that a final reminder should be sent 14 days after this followed by referral to debt recovery, which is the action taken in this instance 14 days after this. Thus, the earliest referral for recovery would be 13th December 2019

I have included the relevant part of BPA code 23 for reference:
“ 23.4 Once you have become able to use your rights to recover from the keeper under POFA 2012 you must do so in line with the following steps in the Code. These steps are based on industry good practice, not on the law.
a) Notification letter
• You should send a notification letter to the keeper. This letter should say that the keeper is now liable to pay the charge, and that the keeper should pay the amount due within a set time.
• You must wait until at least 28 days after you sent the Notice to Keeper before sending the notification letter.
• The notification letter does not have to follow a specific format but should confirm that the amount is due and how it should be paid.

b) Final reminder
• If you do not receive a challenge or appeal, and the parking charge is unpaid, you may send a final reminder.
• You must wait until at least 14 days after you sent the notification letter before sending a final reminder.
• You should make it clear in the final reminder how to make the payment and what you will do next if you do not receive payment.

c) Court action or charge recovery
• When you have sent the final reminder, you must wait at least 14 days before taking further action, such as starting court action or debt recovery against the keeper”

Any alleged overstay by the Driver was an accidental and genuine oversight which had not been identified until a notice was sent to the keeper. As the Keeper of the vehicle, the overinflated parking ticket charge is considered an unreasonable charge for an accidental overstay where time had been paid for. As the keeper, I would be willing to cover the tariff of the alleged overstay or a maximum of the cost of a full day’s stay.


Formal note:
Should you later pursue this charge by way of litigation, note that service of any legal documents by email is expressly disallowed and you are not entitled to assume that the data in this dispute/appeal remains the current address for service in the future.

Yours faithfully,

P25522

Update on this case - As expected TCP avoided the above and stated they are only interested in an extenuating circumstance for an overstay by the driver. Got a couple of letters from Zenith before the latest one from CST.
An "unpaid debt - reminder notice" has now been received from CST Law. A SAR will be sent off shortly asking for the below, if there is anything else that has been missed, please advise.

- All photos taken relating to this case
- all letters/emails sent and received, including a full copy of the Parking Charge Notice and notice to keeper.
- The PDT machine record from <DATE> and record of payments made.
- A list of all Parking Charge Notices they considered to be outstanding against myself/the Vehicle Registration Number
- A full breakdown of the alleged parking charge and justification costs incurred.

This in in the interest of preparing for the LBC that this appears to lead to, from reading other posts.
From reading the forum, should a reply be sent to CST stating a SAR has been sent or should they be ignored as per DRP/Zenith?

In regard to finding the landowner - TCP are not registered on the land registry, a request was sent to the council who stated they did not know either. Is this actually allowed? Do business' have to be registered with the land registry? The fact TCP aren't screams that they are a scamming company. 

D_P_Dance

Nine times out of ten these tickets are scams, so consider complaining to your MP, it can cause the scammer extra costs and work, and has been known to get the charge cancelled.

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.

beamerguy

Assume they have added unknown amounts ???

P25522

beamerguy said:

Assume they have added unknown amounts ???

Surprisingly, the only added amount is from DRP of £49. I was expecting there to have been more added with Zenith/CST but just this initial amount.

beamerguy

P25522 said:

beamerguy said:

Assume they have added unknown amounts ???

Surprisingly, the only added amount is from DRP of £49. I was expecting there to have been more added with Zenith/CST but just this initial amount.

Well DRP cannot add anything,  so CST are just asking for the ticket price

Coupon-mad

From reading the forum, should a reply be sent to CST stating a SAR has been sent or should they be ignored as per DRP/Zenith?

If they have sent a real LBC giving 30 days under the PAP then tell them you are getting a SAR from their client and that you are seeking debt advice, and whilst the debt is denied, they MUST now put the case on hold, in accordance with the PAP for debt claims.

In regard to finding the landowner - TCP are not registered on the land registry, a request was sent to the council who stated they did not know either. Is this actually allowed? Do business' have to be registered with the land registry?

TCP don't own the land so of course they are not on the Land Registry.

You should ask a different question of the Council - WHO PAYS THE NON-DOMESTIC RATES FOR THAT LAND?

P25522

If they have sent a real LBC giving 30 days under the PAP then tell them you are getting a SAR from their client and that you are seeking debt advice, and whilst the debt is denied, they MUST now put the case on hold, in accordance with the PAP for debt claims.

It is not an LBC, just a debt reminder so shall I hold off on the SAR until the LBC is received? It is written and ready to go when timing is appropriate.

.You should ask a different question of the Council - WHO PAYS THE NON-DOMESTIC RATES FOR THAT LAND?

Sorry, I should have been clearer. This was the question I asked and they did not know the answer. On searching the land registry, the property next to the car park is registered but not the address of the car park itself. 

Coupon-mad

The Council has to declare the non-dom ratepayers.  You need to ring back and ask for a Council Manager who DOES know, as this is public information - some Councils put it on their websites.

P25522

The data published says Total Car Parks pay the non-domestic rates, the address' listed are of the car park and the head office. This corresponds with what the council have told me, too. Their website says they seek opportunities for land whether its freehold, leasehold or management contracts - could they therefore be the owners of this particular land?