POPLA appeal - NTK and ANPR

Quidz

Hi - ok, so I paid up on a parking ticket recently against advice on here but received another one at a different location which I am hoping will be successful and hugely appreciate all the information on this forum, so thank you in advance.
One thing I am unsure about is NTK and no evidence of who was driving.
We have photos from ANPR (10 minutes max stay, stayed 20 mins). You cannot see who was driving and we did not state who was driving in our appeal to Civil Enforcement, they then failed to provide this information and state "the PCN was issued under POFA. It is the drivers (sic) responsibility to pay the PCN. However, in the applicable circumstances set out on the PCN liability for the parking charge will transfer to the registered keeper if parking chargers remain unpaid after a period of 29 days from the date of issuance of the PCN"
PCN issued 21/1/21, PCN received in post 1/2/21, appealed 1/2/21.
Where do we stand on this point to POPLA? Sorry I have read a lot of information on this but getting confused when comes to ticket on windscreen scenarios etc compared to this.
Thanks in advance

Quidz

Please see my appeal letter, too late for critique!

You issued me with a parking ticket on 21/01/2021 but I believe it was unlawfully issued. I dispute your 'parking charge', as the keeper of the vehicle. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. Since your PCN is a vague template, I require an explanation of the allegation and your evidence.

 

If the allegation concerns a PDT machine, the data supplied in response to this appeal must include the record of payments made - showing partial VRNs - and an explanation of the reason for the PCN, because your Notice does not explain it.

 

 

I will not be paying your demand for payment for the following:

 

Your parking charge amount claim.

Please explain on which of the following grounds your claim is based:

(i)    Damages for trespass

(ii)   Damages for breach of contract

(iii)   A contractual sum

·         Your loss.

If it is your case that that a trespass was committed or that a contract was breached such that your claim is one for damages; please give me a full breakdown of the actual losses which evidences that this parking charge is a true reflection of the damages caused solely by the alleged parking contravention.

 

·         The charge is disproportionate and not commercially justifiable

The amount you have charged is not based upon any commercially justifiable loss to your company or the landowner.

In my case, the £100 charge you are asking for far exceeds the cost to the landowner. £1 for 20 minutes I believe, I therefore feel the charge you have asked for is excessive.

 

• 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, I have gathered as proof. This is a large car park off a busy road with an exceptional large entrance. Please provide me with a diagram showing the locations and layout of those signs at the car park. Also provide evidence that the wording is in plain and intelligible language and in sufficiently large print as to be legible to a driver at the car park’s entry point.

 

 

Contractual Authority (as required by BPA Ltd AOS CoP B.7)

Please provide me with a copy of the contract between your company and the landowner/landholder that provides the necessary contractual written authority for the issue and enforcement of your Parking Charge Notice - Notice to Keeper. If the allegation involves an alleged overstay of minutes, your evidence must include the actual grace period agreed by the landowner.

 

 

 Your status – the creditor.

Your Parking Charge Notice - Notice to Keeper simply mentions Civil Enforcement. Please tell me who is the actual creditor making this £100 parking charge demand.

Fruitcake

What happened when you complained to the landowner?

The NTK met the dates required by the PoFA to hold a keeper liable. However, you have only shown us a snippet of the wording used. You need to compare that whole wording of the NTK against the PoFA 2012 wording for an NTK to see if the keeper can or cannot be held liable.
You have the NTK, not us, so we cannot comment unless you tell us/show us what the NTK says.

Use all the template appeal points available for you in the third post of the NEWBIES. Post your draft PoPLA appeal here for checking before you submit it.

Note that PoPLA codes last 32 days, but do not miss the deadline.

Fruitcake

I don't know where you found that appeal, but parts of it are five years out of date. It wasn't from the "Official" MSE parking page was it?
The only good thing is that the driver has not been identified, and that you appealed.

D_P_Dance

Delete the  paragraphs about loss and disproportionality, the Supreme court has ruled these  out.  Have you complained to your MP?

Fruitcake

D_P_Dance said:

Delete the whole paragraph about disproportionality, the Supreme court has ruled this out.  Have you complained to your MP?

Too late Mr Dance. It has already been submitted.

Quidz

This was there response.
-----
The PCN just states times, dates, photos of entering and exiting and then parking charge due £100, reduced to £60 if paid in 14 days

KeithP

"the PCN was issued under POFA. It is the drivers (sic) responsibility to pay the PCN. However, in the applicable circumstances set out on the PCN liability for the parking charge will transfer to the registered keeper if parking chargers remain unpaid after a period of 29 days from the date of issuance of the PCN"

That quote from the NtK demonstrates that the NtK does not comply with the strict criteria necessary to hold a keeper liable for any alleged driver's transgression.
In particular, "days from the date of issuance" should be from the date given.
I.e not the date issued, but the date received by the keeper.

This is confirmed in the image of the NtK...

That definitely is not POFA compliant.

Quidz

This is the car park sign they sent to me showing clearly displayed!!!

Fruitcake

I would still feel happier to see the whole wording of the NTK, or a see a copy of it rather than rely on wording from the rejection letter.

D_P_Dance

That sign is far too wordy imo.  It probably also offends against the unfait T&C provisiions of the Consimer Raltaions Act, read this

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5972164/parking-eye-signs-oxford-road-reading

Have you complained to you MP?