private parking charge for 'Stopping/waiting where stopping/waiting is prohibited'

Fruitcake

frostbite_ said:

Coupon-mad said:

Why are you saying they called it a penalty charge?  They didn't.  We do need specific replies!

My mistake they called it a parking charge!! 

I asked you that earlier and you confirmed it was called a penalty. We deal with facts, not half truths and myths. Please be accurate with your answers.

Fruitcake

frostbite_ said:

Fruitcake said:

frostbite_ said:

Fruitcake said:

Parking Control is a trading name of Hounslow Enforcement Ltd, an IPC scammer. Did they really call the NTK a penalty charge?

Yes they did!! I can't believe the cheek of these companies. What are my options? 

Follow the advice in the NEWBIES by sending the ready written appeal template in blue text, unaltered, from the keeper.
Are you absolutely positive that the NTK complies with the strict requirements of the PoFA 2012? If so then revealing the driver's identity in your initial post doesn't matter. However, if it does not comply and cannot transfer liability to the keeper, then you should edit your first post to remove information about who did what.

You should also get pictures of the site and signage.

I will do just that! how do I know whether or not they can transfer liability to the keeper or not? I will take photos today and post them. Thanks for your reply. 

By comparing the NTK, line by line and word by word against the NTK. You can post a redacted copy here if you wish for the regulars to check, but it is you who needs to understand how the PoFA works.

Coupon-mad

This is why the POFA is linked in the NEWBIES thread, so posters can play spot the difference and not ask us!

frostbite_

@Fruitcake
The driver of the above vehicle is liable for a Parking Charge in the above amount which, at the date of this notice, remains unpaid in full and for which the Balance Due remains outstanding. This charge relates to the period of parking specified above, the charge having been incurred for the reason states and liability for the same having been brought to the attention of the driver by clear signage in and around the site at the time of parking.
Payment is now required in the sum of £100. However, if payment is received within 14 days of this notice then a reduced amount of £60 will be accepted in full and final settlement. 
We, the above named company, are the creditor. At the time of this notice we do not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and as the regestered keeper of the vehicle.

YOU ARE NOW INVITED TO

(i) Pay the unpaid parking charge;
OR
(ii) if you were not the driver of the vehicle, to notify us in writing of the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver AND pass this notice on to the driver. Please send these details together with Parking Charge number and vehicle registration number to Parking Control, 86-90 Paul Street, London,EC2A 4NE
Please be warned: that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the Notice is given (i) the amount of unpaid Parking Charge specified in this Notice has not been paid in full, and (ii) we do not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, we will have the right to recover from you, so much of that Parking Charge as remains unpaid.
This notice is deemed to have been given to you on the second working day after the Date of Sending above.

IPC IAS.

There you go guys. Thanks for the help  

Johnersh

It was dark at the time and unfortunately, we didn't see the signs behind us. 

This is, of course, an essential part of the case.  The Google street view is interesting. Just 2 signs, unreadable from the street and what looks like a webcam on a pole to stuff you.  The one that is readable from the street says "no parking: gates in constant use" but nothing about enforcement. 

Certainly it's likely to be difficult for them to assert that you agreed to parking terms for what is basically a driveway.  

Suggest you post:

1. the *exact* wording of the sign on here.  

2. A redacted copy of the photo

You were probably in breach of their terms before anyone could get out the car to read the sign, even had they been lit (which may make it difficultgfor them to enforce). 

An infrared photo from the camera may evidence exactly how dark the surrounds were - otherwise it'd just be a regular still.