PCN - Premier Parking Logistics

akramir

Redx said:

Hard to say , what contravention are they alleging ? You have the information there

Plus you didnt redact those photos so your VRM is showing , do not post any more unredacted images , read the mse warning at the top of the forum

One thought is that the vehicle is not parked correctly , namely that it is not correctly parked inside the confines of a bay , a typical violation of parking rules

They were alleging that car was parked on private land i.e. driver was not using the facilities at the time of parking.

95Rollers

There was a recent case - it was either PPL or VCS where they tried to someone for parking outside a bay and the judge struck it out.  In this case you've parked aligned with the vehicle next to it. The markings on the ground are faded and underneath the other vehicles so you cannot really gauge bay spacing. 

Also the shop was closed - what's to say people haven't driven in with a view to purchasing or viewing stock only to find it closed then decide to check opening times on their phone, make a telephone enquiry or look for an alternative local bed shop- only to be whacked with an ANPR penalty charge for the short duration they stopped by!?!  Sure-fire way to lose customers. 

akramir

95Rollers said:

There was a recent case - it was either PPL or VCS where they tried to someone for parking outside a bay and the judge struck it out.  In this case you've parked aligned with the vehicle next to it. The markings on the ground are faded and underneath the other vehicles so you cannot really gauge bay spacing. 

Also the shop was closed - what's to say people haven't driven in with a view to purchasing or viewing stock only to find it closed then decide to check opening times on their phone, make a telephone enquiry or look for an alternative local bed shop- only to be whacked with an ANPR penalty charge for the short duration they stopped by!?!  Sure-fire way to lose customers. 

Thank you for your thoughts.

I wrote to get the SAR and I’ve now got the evidence from PPL. I had also written to the DCBLegal to inform them about the SAR.

Should I then get back to PPL informing them of my formal response as per the below letter?

Umkomaas

I had also written to the DCBLegal to inform them about the SAR.

Did you tell them to put your case on hold for 30 days while you took debt advice (not because you were awaiting a SAR response)?  What exactly have you said to DCBL in responding to the LBC?

You no longer deal with PPL direct. Everything must now go via their lawyers. 

akramir

Umkomaas said:

I had also written to the DCBLegal to inform them about the SAR.

Did you tell them to put your case on hold for 30 days while you took debt advice (not because you were awaiting a SAR response)?  What exactly have you said to DCBL in responding to the LBC?

You no longer deal with PPL direct. Everything must now go via their lawyers. 

My response to the lawyers at the time of also writing to PPL.

DCB Legal

In response to your letter dated 13-Jan-2022

I am seeking debt advice but I deny any debt and the case must be put 'on hold' for not less than 30 days under the PAP for debt claims 2017. In addition I have sent your client a SAR.

Regards

Irfan Akram

D_P_Dance

I think that Umko missed out the word "newvise".

Umkomaas

akramir said:

Umkomaas said:

I had also written to the DCBLegal to inform them about the SAR.

Did you tell them to put your case on hold for 30 days while you took debt advice (not because you were awaiting a SAR response)?  What exactly have you said to DCBL in responding to the LBC?

You no longer deal with PPL direct. Everything must now go via their lawyers. 

My response to the lawyers at the time of also writing to PPL.

DCB Legal

In response to your letter dated 13-Jan-2022

I am seeking debt advice but I deny any debt and the case must be put 'on hold' for not less than 30 days under the PAP for debt claims 2017. In addition I have sent your client a SAR.

Regards

Irfan Akram

OK. So now you examine and dissect the SAR evidence you've received and start thinking about drafting your Defence, which you will need to write if they serve court proceedings, probably shortly after the expiry of the 30 days hold. You've at least a month to do your research, starting with reading as many as possible of other PPL/DCBL threads that are at the defence stage (or later) to see how others have dealt with their cases.

In addition, read the NEWBIES FAQ Announcement, second post, which takes you right through the court process from LBC to court hearing. Also, there is a ready made defence written for you, one of the only 5 Announcements pinned to the top of the forum thread list - read that and become familiar with what you need to do in a few weeks time. 

Your own preparation is key in dealing with this successfully. 

Redx

A few points

You were not the driver , because you say so , it was a family member
If PPL failed POFA , you have no liability in law as keeper , so check for POFA compliance, or not

The signage was forbidding and very poor , difficult to read and understand
The vehicle was not fully in a bay because none of them were

Poor bay markings on what looks like a poorly maintained car park

For a contract to exist ( parking contract here ) , there has to be an offer , consideration , and acceptance
No actual parking offer was made to this driver , so no consideration or acceptance

Depending on time on site , a reasonable grace period was maybe not given

There is no legal compulsory reason to name the driver , so not your problem if PPL failed POFA , so don't

Tell us if the NTK complied with POFA , in both wording and timescales and content , the newbies FAQ explains how

akramir

Umkomaas said:

akramir said:

Umkomaas said:

I had also written to the DCBLegal to inform them about the SAR.

Did you tell them to put your case on hold for 30 days while you took debt advice (not because you were awaiting a SAR response)?  What exactly have you said to DCBL in responding to the LBC?

You no longer deal with PPL direct. Everything must now go via their lawyers. 

My response to the lawyers at the time of also writing to PPL.

DCB Legal

In response to your letter dated 13-Jan-2022

I am seeking debt advice but I deny any debt and the case must be put 'on hold' for not less than 30 days under the PAP for debt claims 2017. In addition I have sent your client a SAR.

Regards

Irfan Akram

OK. So now you examine and dissect the SAR evidence you've received and start thinking about drafting your Defence, which you will need to write if they serve court proceedings, probably shortly after the expiry of the 30 days hold. You've at least a month to do your research, starting with reading as many as possible of other PPL/DCBL threads that are at the defence stage (or later) to see how others have dealt with their cases.

In addition, read the NEWBIES FAQ Announcement, second post, which takes you right through the court process from LBC to court hearing. Also, there is a ready made defence written for you, one of the only 5 Announcements pinned to the top of the forum thread list - read that and become familiar with what you need to do in a few weeks time. 

Your own preparation is key in dealing with this successfully. 

Thank you so much for the detailed guidance!

Just to triple check, do I get back to PPL with anything in writing within the next 30 days or wait until they serve court proceedings? I’m asking because they asked me either to pay or respond in their initial letter of Notice of Claim…

akramir

Redx said:

A few points

You were not the driver , because you say so , it was a family member
If PPL failed POFA , you have no liability in law as keeper , so check for POFA compliance, or not

The signage was forbidding and very poor , difficult to read and understand
The vehicle was not fully in a bay because none of them were

Poor bay markings on what looks like a poorly maintained car park

For a contract to exist ( parking contract here ) , there has to be an offer , consideration , and acceptance
No actual parking offer was made to this driver , so no consideration or acceptance

Depending on time on site , a reasonable grace period was maybe not given

There is no legal compulsory reason to name the driver , so not your problem if PPL failed POFA , so don't

Tell us if the NTK complied with POFA , in both wording and timescales and content , the newbies FAQ explains how

This is super helpful - thank you! I’ll get back to you after checking if NTK complied with POFA shortly…