CP Plus NTK amount charged more than signage
Comments
-
It is not a fine, it is an invoice from an ex-clamper to compensate them for the alleged harm they suffered when you did what you did. We call it a scam. Pay them not a penny unless a judge so orders it.
Nine times out of ten these tickets are scams, so consider complaining to your MP., it can cause the scammer extra costs, and in some cases, cancellation.
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 later this year,
Just as the clampers were finally closed down, so hopefully will many of these companies, 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/of these Private Parking Companies.
You never know how far you can go until you go too far.-1 -
Hi all
Thanks for the support and guidance. I am looking to submit my appeal to POPLA using the template on here.
I am uncertain:
* if the 'period of parking' as required by POFA means they have to say what the duration of parking was or if they just need to stipulate the time at which they claim the contravention occurred.
* What part of POFA is breached that relates to PCS writing to me on behalf of CPP.
* If the signage that permitted parking to certain permit holders would be arguable as not in force given the communication from the landowner as below.
Anyway, is the following appeal likely to be successful? Have I missed anything or should I remove any of the appeal points?
Thanks in advance
Yaks
The alleged contravention did not occurThe parking attendant got it wrong and the vehicle was not parked inappropriately at the time the ticket was issued. This is due to the fact that communication was issued from the landowner (##### Hospital) to all staff that parking restrictions were not in force due to COVID-19, with the only restrictions being that red and yellow permit holders to park in red and yellow zones respectively. The parking bay had no clear markings or signage to indicate that the bay was either a red or yellow zone. Please see attached evidence, an email communication to all staff at the Hospital and also pictures of the vehicle parked in the bay, as proof of my claim.
There was insufficient signage
The car park in question has no clear signage to explain what the relevant parking restrictions are. This means no contract can be formed with the landowner and all tickets are issued illegally. Please see attached evidence, photos of the conflicting signage that indicates parking is free (at various sites, including payment terminals), I have gathered as proof.
The charge is disproportionate and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss
The amount charged is not based upon any genuine pre-estimate of loss to the company or the landowner.
In my case, the £140 charge being asked for far exceeds the cost to the landowner where signage indicated that parking was free. I therefore feel the amount asked for is excessive.
The notice to keeper is incorrect
The Notice to Keeper failed to meet the obligations of Schedule 4 of the POFA Act 2012. There are several issues with the NTK:
o The Notice to keeper does not specify the period of parking as per the requirement of Paragraph 8(2)(a).
o No discount period or amount is mentioned as per the requirement of Paragraph 8(2)(g). The BPA Code of Conduct clause 20.7 requires the discount to be at least 40% of the charge if payment is made within 14 days.
Abuse of process
The amount requested is £140. The signage that CP Plus are presenting as evidence shows a maximum charge of £100. The NTK appears to add charges without justification or notice.
BPA Code of conduct breached
The BPA Code of Conduct clause 20.5 sets an upper limit of £100, and if the charge is more than £100, the operator must be able to justify the amount in advance. The requested amount is £140, and the operator has not justified the amount in advance.
0 -
You have no hope with that ancient POPLA appeal, where on earth did you find one that talks about no GPEOL?! Please don't tell us there is a MSE article suggesting that rubbish for POPLA?* if the 'period of parking' as required by POFA means they have to say what the duration of parking was or if they just need to stipulate the time
at which they claim the contravention occurred.
The period of parking is OK as long as they state a time. ANPR PCNs never show the true parking period and POPLA don't care.None. That's not what we are saying. It's about whether the NTK meets the POFA para 8 or 9.
* What part of POFA is breached that relates to PCS writing to me on behalf of CPP.PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
CLICK at the top of this/any page where it says:
Forum Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD0 -
I got the template linked to from step 2 here: https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/reclaim/private-parking-tickets/ I take it that is the wrong one to use.
There was a notice to driver attached to the windscreen (CP Plus have a picture showing that), so this is an appeal about the NTK sent after the NTD.
Are any of the points valid for appeal though?
0 -
Surprised they have got away with that amount on the ntk (vis pcs) for so long1
-
yaks20 said:I got the template linked to from step 2 here: https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/reclaim/private-parking-tickets/ I take it that is the wrong one to use.
Refer once again to the NEWBIES thread. This time, the third post.1 -
I'm sorry if I'm being dim, I've looked through the newbies first 3 posts multiple times and I'm still none the wiser.
CP Plus is specifically mentioned as a one liner saying they don't use POFA wording and so the appeal should point that out. However I can't see how they aren't using POFA wording (except perhaps by not offering the keeper the discounted period). From further reading it appears that perhaps my only valid appeal points are:
* Conflicting signage at the payment terminals and other sites saying parking is free
* Communication from hospital to staff causing ambiguity as to red and yellow zones and permits, but the bay is not marked up for yellow or red zones.
* The charge of £140 is above the BPA code of conduct's £100 max, and any extra must be justified in advance, which they haven't as the NTK requests £140 straight away.
* The addition of £40 on top of what was shown on the sign as a charge of £100 makes this an abuse of process.
Do I simply formalise those 4 points and submit the appeal? I couldn't find similar appeals to what I'm appealing.
0 -
If they are not using POFA you will be able to point out to PoPLA that as as the keeper you have no liability.
That does rely upon the assumption that they don't know who the driver is.
Do they know who was driving?1 -
Hi Keith
No they don't know who was driving, and it wasn't me in any case. But they have sent a NTK that seems to match with POFA wording, and within the 56 days that they would have after the alleged contravention as they issued a NTD on the windscreen. What part of the POFA would invalidate their NTK? I'm really confused.
0 -
Usually a lack of the 8(2)f or 9(2)f warning.PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
CLICK at the top of this/any page where it says:
Forum Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD0
Categories
- All Categories
- 342.5K Banking & Borrowing
- 249.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.4K Spending & Discounts
- 234.6K Work, Benefits & Business
- 607.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 172.8K Life & Family
- 247.4K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.8K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards