PCN received - Wells-Next-The-Sea Port of Wells Quay Car Park

Blue_Horizon

Hi, having read the FAQs and carried out some research, I am asking for comments on our case.  Basic facts are:
- PCN is addressed to my wife (Registered Keeper) - although the house number on the address is printed wrong on the PCN
- Alleged incident date is 4 November - no ticket was issued on the day
 - PCN issue date is 18 November and it arrived on 20 November 
- Charge is for £60 rising to £100 if not paid within 14 days of issue date
- Company is Civil Enforcement Ltd
Having read the FAQs, my approach is to send the standard response via their web site.  I've three questions:
- I read that in a case where no ticket is issued on the day, the PCN must arrive with 14 days of the incident.  I understood that the law allows 2 days for the notice to arrive in the post.  In this case the PCN arrived on 20 November and is date 18 November.    It appears to be significant, should I reference this? 
- Should I send a subject access request to see what data they have?
- Should I send a complaint to the land owner?  From what I can see there are lots of complaints about this site and the land owner isn't bothered.

Many Thanks

D_P_Dance

Have you read all the previous cases concerning this car park, especially those which concern its status under bye-laws?

Also, have you complained to your MP?      

Redx

People should ALWAYS complain to the landowner

CEL rarely comply with POFA , so given the timescales above , they failed anyway , bearing in mind that the law is not mandatory so only protects a keeper , plus if bylaws apply then POFA does not

So yes appeal as keeper using the blue text template from the newbies FAQ sticky thread near the top of the forum, if the V5C is in the keepers name , so not a lease or hire or company vehicle for example , but a private vehicle

Add a short extra line stating that they have failed POFA 2012 so to cancel the PCN

A SAR is usually done before a court claim , so not done at this early stage

Coupon-mad

I read that in a case where no ticket is issued on the day, the PCN must arrive with 14 days of the incident.  I understood that the law allows 2 days for the notice to arrive in the post.  In this case the PCN arrived on 20 November and is date 18 November.    It appears to be significant, should I reference this? 

Yes, just add a sentence or two to the template defence, stating that you can see that the NTK is non-POFA.

Blue_Horizon

Many thanks for the feedback.  I've taken this on board and submitted an appeal via the CEL website.  It's interesting that the first question they ask is whether you are the driver - it's a Yes/No response that feels like a trap!  I've also emailed the landowner and my MP.
I've had a look at the status of the land on which the car park is based and found some conflicting information.  It seems that the land is not "relevant land" as it is under statutory control, although I could find a definite reference to this.  This means that they cannot legally pursue the register keeper, only the driver, and they an admission or proof of this.

Blue_Horizon

I'm pleased to report that a letter was received today from CEL informing us that they have cancelled the PCN, although no reason given.
I also had a response from the Harbour Office, who explained that they believe the land is not subject to bye-laws and therefore the operation of the car park is perfectly legal.
No response yet from my MP.
It seems to me that the operation of car parks is in need of reform and therefore I will continue my campaign for changes to regulation and the law.
Thanks for those who provide sound advice.

nosferatu1001

Complain to the bpa

they cannot make you answer a question like that. Cannot. 

Umkomaas

Blue_Horizon said:

I also had a response from the Harbour Office, who explained that they believe the land is not subject to bye-laws and therefore the operation of the car park is perfectly legal. 

Thanks for those who provide sound advice.

I believe they are correct insofar as the byelaws have been subject to a 'revision order' for the past 26 years (longer than many of those who come here have been on the planet!).

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1994/1440/made

What hasn't changed, as I understand it, is the fact that the harbour is subject to statutory control. This means that the land is 'not relevant land' in the context of PoFA, and the registered keeper cannot be held liable. It does not mean that PCNs issued there are void/invalid/unenforceable.