Questions about Schedule 4 of POFA

ihatetrump

I've seen lots of FCN's for Willen Lake and other car parks operated by Napier but not seen one for this particular car park, even though it has 200+ spaces.

I don't want to waste your valuable time here but I would like to have a clear understanding of the validity of the NTK  especially if this actually gets as far as the Directions Hearing  nd not having been given to date the opportunity of submitting a WS. Here's the heading of the FCN :


On the basis they tried to issue the NTK under the PoFA and on the assumption it is non-relevant land (as noted, still to be validified), then can I argue that the PPC has not even submitted a NTK, is it time barred and as such the case should be dismissed? (and can I ask that at the Directions Hearing?).

Umkomaas

There's no 'time-barring' of a NtK per se. In order to hold the keeper liable they need to comply with PoFA on dates (14 days for an ANPR capture, between 28 and 56 days for a windscreen ticket). They can simply issue a NtK to ask the keeper to provide them with the driver's details.  

After 6 months of the parking event, the DVLA will not release keeper details.  But nothing makes the notice totally invalid or voidable. This is an unregulated sector.

KeithP

You already know what @Umkomaas has just told you...

Umkomaas said:

They can simply issue a NtK to ask the keeper to provide them with the driver's details.  

 On 22 June at 9:30PM @Coupon-mad confirmed...

They can [send a NTK], but only to enquire as to who was driving. 

After further query, at 23 June at 1:13PM I wrote...

The PPC can issue a valid NtK. The legitimate purpose of that NtK is to ask the keeper for the driver's name and address.

Then later the same day, at 23 June at 3:09PM, following yet another query, CM said...

Coupon-mad said:

@KeithP didn’t say it was valid under para 9. He said a NTK that is non POFA is still valid.

And it is; to hold a driver liable they are allowed to ask the keeper who that driver was.

Coupon-mad

You should report Napier to the DVLA Data Sharing Team for sending a NTK that misstates the law on liability, something that PPCs are banned for.

ihatetrump

Thank you @KeithP - Very clear now!!!

@Coupon-mad - more than happy to report Napier - once I have 100% clarity on the land ownership. Am I correct in saying this would be in reference to the following paragraph included in their NTK?:

Coupon-mad

That and the heading you showed us, that says it was 'given under the POFA'. 

That cannot possibly be true and is therefore, misleading, if the location is not relevant land.

ihatetrump

So first thing this morning a heavy thud through the letterbox as BW Legals' witness statement arrived. I'm frustrated because there have been no directions from the Court concerning this filing, despite my e-mails and their replies (which have been posted in the thread).

The witness Statement is 13 pages - which I will be happy to post with redactions. They then include a copy of the lease agreement between Napier and Milton Keynes Development Partnership LLP (MKDP) - which is a Milton Keynes Council body.

The lease (which is month to month), makes reference to a separate Management Agreement (and under which the rent is defined) - a copy of which was also attached - one clause missing  (presumably redacted) which I assume to be the financial agreement.

Following the lease, they have included all signage photos, map etc together with correspondence which I was already aware of from the SAR.

What is the best way for me to post their WS (with redactions) on to the forum and should I also include the lease and management agreement? which I assume to be a matter of public record. 

 

D_P_Dance

Is it  permissable to redact clauses from a document which they will rely on in court?

Fruitcake

Redact your personal data then scan their WS. Upload it to a web hosting site such as Dropbox, then post the link here.

Tell us what they have redacted.

If they have sent you an electronic version then it would be easier for you to use that.

ihatetrump

It may take me a little while to access the scanner to upload their WS - but will do so ASAP. What about uploading the lease and the annexed Agreement? may be useful for others?

The lease is with Milton Keynes Development Partnership LLP which is wholly owned by Milton Keynes Council (and acknowledged in their Companies House filings). Based on the earlier comments in this thread (and the comprehensive replies - thanks to everyone who has commented!), as the keeper I cannot be held liable under PoFA -  therefore, what are the recommendations in terms of my filing a WS, which has not even been given to me in terms of direction from the Court? Can it be a short form focussing on the non-relevant land or should I be throwing everything into it?

When you see their WS, you will see that they are insulting in the extreme to me (nasty even) and my intelligence as well as  to this forum.