Received NTK but never got a windscreen ticket?

Umkomaas

The Notice to Keeper does not meet the requirements of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (Schedule 4) - too late in its issue and not 'given' in time, yet the PPC is attempting to incorrectly invoke keeper liability and are misrepresenting their position. 

Send a complaint to the DVLA and ask them to investigate. Other PPCs have been suspended from access to the DVLA database for exactly the same misrepresentation. This might stop the case in its tracks. Attach copies of all the documentation you have received from the PPC and Gladstones. 

ccrt@dvla.gov.uk 

and

KADOEservice.support@dvla.gov.uk 

Copy the same complaint and attachments to each email address

freeparking22

Umkomaas said:

The Notice to Keeper does not meet the requirements of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (Schedule 4) - too late in its issue and not 'given' in time, yet the PPC is attempting to incorrectly invoke keeper liability and are misrepresenting their position. 

Send a complaint to the DVLA and ask them to investigate. Other PPCs have been suspended from access to the DVLA database for exactly the same misrepresentation. This might stop the case in its tracks. Attach copies of all the documentation you have received from the PPC and Gladstones. 

ccrt@dvla.gov.uk 

and

KADOEservice.support@dvla.gov.uk 

Copy the same complaint and attachments to each email address

Hi, this sounds great especially if the company could possibly be suspended. However, I have just been reading the schedule 4 document and I am struggling to find a time limit for an NTK to be sent to the keeper? Could you point me in the right direction? I have seen that the company must send the NTK within 14 days if using a cctv or anpr system but there is no cameras and the company claimed to have put a ticket on the vehicle (they didn’t). There is also a section about signage in the schedule 4 document so would this be worth mentioning in my complaint as there was no signage at the parking site. Thanks

Coupon-mad

Paragraph 8

freeparking22

Coupon-mad said:

Paragraph 8

Thanks, this covers the signage aspect so I will include this but still unsure on the late issue of the NTK as the document says the landowner must wait 28 days before requesting information for the NTK but no mention of a time limit to send this?

Redx

freeparking22 said:

Coupon-mad said:

Paragraph 8

Thanks, this covers the signage aspect so I will include this but still unsure on the late issue of the NTK as the document says the landowner must wait 28 days before requesting information for the NTK but no mention of a time limit to send this?

If a windscreen ticket is issued , the time limit is 29 to 56 days to arrive in the post to the keeper , meaning they can access the keeper details after 28 days if they don't hear back after an NTD PCN on the windscreen is issued ( a windscreen PCN  , or NTD , D as in Driver )

How do you actually know that no windscreen ticket was issued. ?

The first picture states that they did affix a PCN to the windscreen , which we would expect them to do

freeparking22

Redx said:

freeparking22 said:

Coupon-mad said:

Paragraph 8

Thanks, this covers the signage aspect so I will include this but still unsure on the late issue of the NTK as the document says the landowner must wait 28 days before requesting information for the NTK but no mention of a time limit to send this?

If a windscreen ticket is issued , the time limit is 29 to 56 days to arrive in the post to the keeper , meaning they can access the keeper details after 28 days if they don't hear back after an NTD PCN on the windscreen is issued ( a windscreen PCN  , or NTD , D as in Driver )

How do you actually know that no windscreen ticket was issued. ?

The first picture states that they did affix a PCN to the windscreen , which we would expect them to do

Okay so I wouldn’t be able to complain about this then as it arrived within 56 days. I couldn’t say for certain there wasn’t a PCN but it definitely wasn’t removed by the driver or the keeper.

Thanks for the help, I will complain to the DVLA about the signage anyway hopefully that might resolve it.

Redx

Thanks , I didn't think you would know if one was on the windscreen or not , chances are it was ghost ticketing on the day , especially as the first letter says it was issued on the day , plus more than 28 days elapsed before the December letter was issued

My opinion is that they did issue a windscreen PCN , the driver or passenger never found one but that doesn't mean that there wasn't one , it's a typical sc@m by the PPC scum , known as ghost ticketing

If they told a judge they did issue a windscreen PCN , in court , you have no proof that they didn't , so a judge would believe them , especially if they issued a postal notice 5 weeks later. All standard practice

Your evidence would say that the driver did not find any windscreen PCN , but the driver has no Idea why , and no proof either way , so they would win that point

Theories may abound , but their postal NTK backs up their account of the events on the day of the incident , and they know it

Coupon-mad

Para 8 of schedule 4 is nothing to do with signage.

freeparking22

Redx said:

Thanks , I didn't think you would know if one was on the windscreen or not , chances are it was ghost ticketing on the day , especially as the first letter says it was issued on the day , plus more than 28 days elapsed before the December letter was issued

My opinion is that they did issue a windscreen PCN , the driver or passenger never found one but that doesn't mean that there wasn't one , it's a typical sc@m by the PPC scum , known as ghost ticketing

If they told a judge they did issue a windscreen PCN , in court , you have no proof that they didn't , so a judge would believe them , especially if they issued a postal notice 5 weeks later. All standard practice

Your evidence would say that the driver did not find any windscreen PCN , but the driver has no Idea why , and no proof either way , so they would win that point

Theories may abound , but their postal NTK backs up their account of the events on the day of the incident , and they know it

Okay thanks for the help this makes sense, so really now my only real argument is that the there was no signage and that the business on the land was closed down at the time?

freeparking22

Coupon-mad said:

Para 8 of schedule 4 is nothing to do with signage.

Apologies, I was reading the guidance on schedule 4 and not the document itself. Having now read the correct paragraph I’m struggling to find how the PPC has gone against any of the information in this paragraph and how the times for the NTK could be incorrect? Thanks