But, I thought I had paid!

Nogoodnik

Hi Misty - thank you.

The PCN came straight to the keeper, as opposed to the company which is why I was initially confused, but upon digging the keeper is listed as a person not a company, and the keeper has the V5C, so the advice upthread was in that case I should appeal as the keeper.

EDIT - Ok, thank you I've just read your edited response. I'm going to get that template then, as no other documents were sent. Just a single sheet PCN.

DoaM

Nogoodnik wrote: »

No, the keeper was notified directly via post - just the PCN, no other documents included.

Hang on ... have you checked with the lease company whether CEL first contacted them to get the hirer's details? Or did CEL write directly to the hirer (as keeper)?

Does the day-to-day keeper hold the V5C document for the vehicle?

Your reply above came in whilst I was composing this response.

MistyZ

So you are the hirer and leased the car from a hire company who hold the V5C?

I have no shame lol, I'm still confused! But what matters is if you are still confused thrash it out now with the other regulars who are more experienced than me.

And identify that landowner or land management company. Can usually be done via some determined googling. The first appeal plus landowner complaint are two separate courses of action which need to be done at about the same time.

Fruitcake

I'm still confused as well Misty. I did explain the set up in an earlier post and the OP says they understood, but hasn't confirmed where they actually stand.

Nogoodnik, please tell us if the V5C is in your name or in that of the lease company.

You can ask the council who pays the non-domestic business rates to get a good idea of the landowner's identity, or you can pay the land registry a few quid to get a definitive answer.

Always ask the council planning department if permission has been granted for ANPR scameras, and if advertising consent has been granted for the signs. Not having the latter is a criminal offence although I believe only the council can take the scammers to court.

In addition always, always complain to your MP about this unregulated scam.

Nogoodnik

Fruitcake wrote: »

I'm still confused as well Misty. I did explain the set up in an earlier post and the OP says they understood, but hasn't confirmed where they actually stand.

Nogoodnik, please tell us if the V5C is in your name or in that of the lease company.

I did understand, but I didn't know the answer - which is why I've been off trying to find out. I've been given scant help from the lease hire provider but they have confirmed today that THEY are the registered keepers and provided the hirer details to the PPC last month!

So all my points about timescales are moot. Cool.

I don't know what the lease hire company provided in terms of documentation to the PPC, and whether they were compliant. BUT, I do know what the PPC didn't enclose anything extra, other than the single sheet PCN.

So, here's my proposed response:

Dear Sir/Madam,

Parking Charge Notice: Vehicle Registration:

I refer to the above-detailed Parking Charge Notice (“PCN”) issued to me by as a Notice to Hirer. I confirm that as the hirer of this vehicle, I am its keeper for the purpose of the corresponding definition under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (“POFA”) and I write to formally challenge the validity of this PCN.

You will no doubt be familiar with the strict requirements of Schedule 4 of POFA to be followed in order for a parking operator to be able to invoke keeper liability for a Parking Charge. There are a number of reasons why this Notice to Hirer did not comply with POFA; in order that you may understand why, I suggest that you carefully study the details of Paragraphs 13 and 14 of Schedule 4 in particular.


Please note that on the date of the alleged contravention, Payment was attempted in good faith, and in a timely manner. In an attempt to resolve this dispute, please find attached phone records that the clearly show a 4:45 minute call was placed in good faith during the window of time it is claimed the vehicle was parked, as stated in your PCN.

With the above points being considered, I appeal this charge. Respectfully I must request that this appeal be upheld, and charge summarily dismissed with no further action taken.


Alternatively, should you choose to reject my challenge, please provide me with details of the Independent Appeals Service (POPLA), their contact details and a unique POPLA appeal reference so that I may escalate the matter to POPLA.

Thank you for your cooperation and I look forward to receiving your response within the relevant timescales specified under the British Parking Association Ltd Code of Practice.


Yours faithfully,
Nogoodnik

The_Deep

Payment was attempted in good faith, and in a timely manner

If this gets to court then it boils down to one thing, did you pay, (or try to pay), or not. A judge must then decide, OTBOP, where the truth lies.

If he/she thinks that you genuinely thought that you had paid but the technology let you down then he/she should not, imo have difficulty in finding for you.


I am struggling to see the relevance of RKs, drivers, timescales, POFA, et al.

Nogoodnik

Ugh... I may just pay it then. I have the phone records, but of course no way of proving the content of that call, and the idea of going to court over this is crazy!

KeithP

Nogoodnik wrote: »

Ugh... I may just pay it then. I have the phone records, but of course no way of proving the content of that call, and the idea of going to court over this is crazy!

What??

It is that idea that's crazy.

You have told us that the Notice to Hirer that the PPC sent you did not include copies of the documents described in POFA paragraph 13.

They have therefore failed to transfer any driver's liability to the keeper.

In other words, if the PPC does not know the identity of the driver, they are stuffed.

I would leave out this from your response:

Please note that on the date of the alleged contravention, Payment was attempted in good faith, and in a timely manner. In an attempt to resolve this dispute, please find attached phone records that the clearly show a 4:45 minute call was placed in good faith during the window of time it is claimed the vehicle was parked, as stated in your PCN.

With the above points being considered, I appeal this charge. Respectfully I must request that this appeal be upheld, and charge summarily dismissed with no further action taken.

Just my opinion. Wait and see if other opinions are forthcoming.

Fruitcake

I agree with Keith. Personally I wouldn't mention the attempt to pay if the NTH was non-PoFA compliant.

MistyZ

The_Deep wrote: »

I am struggling to see the relevance of RKs, drivers, timescales, POFA, et al.

The relevance is that this has indeed turned out to be an apparently straightforward hire car case. And as the Newbies' thread clearly states, there is a definite way to do the first appeal and a very definite focus at the POPLA stage on the (usual) non-appearance of documents which, according to the PoFA 13 & 14 should be sent to the hirer with the NTH.

The 'method' has worked for tons of people on this forum. And it worked for someone I helped off forum. Not that anything is guaranteed at the POPLA stage but the chances of a win based on PoFA 13 & 14 make a POPLA appeal extra worth doing.

Go for it OP, that's my advice. Just think 'hire car' ... look for other hire car CEL threads. Doesn't take much to become an armchair expert on that subject at this stage of the game.