Claim Form - County Court Business Centre

AnotherForumite

Coupon-mad said:

POFA doesn't, and nor do the Codes of Practice.

You can't pluck a figure out of thin air, nor create a contractual term that has the effect of charging for the same thing twice.

Quote from POFA:

4 (5) The maximum sum which may be recovered from the keeper by virtue of the right conferred by this paragraph is the amount specified in the notice to keeper under paragraph 8(2)(c) or (d) or, as the case may be, 9(2)(d) (less any payments towards the unpaid parking charges which are received after the time so specified).

Coupon-mad

Yup, but happily, the CRA stops you from charging for the same 'work' twice.

AnotherForumite

Coupon-mad said:

Yup, but happily, the CRA stops you from charging for the same 'work' twice.

Like I say, depends how the contract is written; you could have two contracts on one sign.
e.g. Contract 1 (shortened for ease): pay and display or agree to pay £100.
Contract 2 (again shortened): pay the £100 within 28 days or agree to pay £60

As they are two separate contracts and ‘performances’, there is no double recovery.

nosferatu1001

And as the ntk MUST repeat the info from the ntd, where there was a ntd there CANNOT be any higher amount. Otherwise it has not repeated 

Coupon-mad

AnotherForumite said:

Coupon-mad said:

Yup, but happily, the CRA stops you from charging for the same 'work' twice.

Like I say, depends how the contract is written; you could have two contracts on one sign.
e.g. Contract 1 (shortened for ease): pay and display or agree to pay £100.
Contract 2 (again shortened): pay the £100 within 28 days or agree to pay £60

As they are two separate contracts and ‘performances’, there is no double recovery.

You reckon?  I'm not going into why you are wrong but that's laughable.

AnotherForumite

nosferatu1001 said:

And as the ntk MUST repeat the info from the ntd, where there was a ntd there CANNOT be any higher amount. Otherwise it has not repeated 

In the case of a windscreen ticket yes, but there is no reason why the contract to pay the £60 if the £100 isn’t paid in 28 days can’t be detailed on the NTD also.

AnotherForumite

Coupon-mad said:

AnotherForumite said:

Coupon-mad said:

Yup, but happily, the CRA stops you from charging for the same 'work' twice.

Like I say, depends how the contract is written; you could have two contracts on one sign.
e.g. Contract 1 (shortened for ease): pay and display or agree to pay £100.
Contract 2 (again shortened): pay the £100 within 28 days or agree to pay £60

As they are two separate contracts and ‘performances’, there is no double recovery.

You reckon?  I'm not going into why you are wrong but that's laughable.

Do enlighten me, happy to be proved wrong and concede; I’m not as closed minded as some.

Coupon-mad

No, I am not showing my hand here, to a PPC. 

AnotherForumite

Coupon-mad said:

No, I am not showing my hand here, to a PPC. 

🤣👍

nosferatu1001

The signs do not have such an amount specified, and no ntk can include such a "contract" for the first time because zero consideration flows, and there is nothing to accept. 

But so far you feel PPC like, so be careful