Excel Parking Claim Form - Defence for Review

nosferatu1001

Yes, state it does not meet the definition of a notice to driver as given in pofa, so they have failed to meet para 9

Fiortdunlop2020

Thanks both Coupon-mad and nosferatu1001
Basically added a new Para in defence above the previous Para 18 NtK POFA Para 9 a & f failure (now Para #19).

#18. The claimant affixed a ‘Privacy Notice’ on the windscreen of the defandant’s car on the day in question. This is quintessentially another version of a Notice to Keeper and does not meet the definition of a Notice to a Keeper as prescribed by the POFA and therefore failed to meet the requirements as detailed under Paragraph 9.

Attached revised defence
Many Thanks

PS Just to be clear a NtK was issued after the Privacy Notice was affixed.

KeithP

#18. The claimant affixed a ‘Privacy Notice’ on the windscreen of the defandant’s car on the day in question. This is quintessentially another version of a Notice to Keeper and does not meet the definition of a Notice to a Keeper as prescribed by the POFA and therefore failed to meet the requirements as detailed under Paragraph 9.

No, that's still not right.

Anything fixed to a windscreen is a Notice to Driver.

1505grandad

Also typo  -  "defandant’s"  

Fiortdunlop2020

Good Morning KeithP & 1505grandad thanks for feedback. Amended to following:

19. The claimant affixed a ‘Privacy Notice’ on the windscreen of the Defendant’s car on the day in question. This Privacy Notice does not meet the definition of a Notice to a Keeper as prescribed by the POFA and therefore failed to meet the requirements as detailed under Paragraph 9.

Many Thanks

Le_Kirk

It still states "keeper"; if it is affixed to the windscreen it is a Notice to Driver (NtD).

nosferatu1001

I even stated notice to driver the first time around op

you keep being told to change it so change it! 

Fiortdunlop2020

Thanks and apologies KeithP and Le_Kirk; it was even highlighted in bold  Now amended 
19. The claimant affixed a ‘Privacy Notice’ on the windscreen of the Defendant’s car on the day in question. This Privacy Notice does not meet the definition of a Notice to a Driver as prescribed by the POFA and therefore failed to meet the requirements as detailed under Paragraph 9.

nosferatu1001

Therefore the claimants notice to keeper failed to meet...

if it had been a notice to driver then the ntk failed para 8. It wasn't, so the ntk failed para 9. Is that clear in your head now?

Fiortdunlop2020

Hi nosferatu1001 sincere apologies you did indeed.
If honest I am still confused so sorry
But interpret as the subsequent NtK following NtD (Privacy Notice) failed POFA Para 9. therefore my Defence para #19 should read as follows:

19. The claimant affixed a ‘Privacy Notice’ on the windscreen of the Defendant’s car on the day in question. This Privacy Notice does not meet the definition of a Notice to a Driver as prescribed by the POFA and therefore the Claimants Notice to Keeper failed to meet the requirements as detailed under Paragraph 9.

Is this correct? Advance apologies if not.

Regards