CCJ. Parking fine sent to old address

Redx

So it doesn't state why the breach actually was , plus says that the driver is liable , which may be true , but the keeper was not the driver so the claimant has failed to transfer liability from the driver to the keeper due to non compliance with POFA , as you correctly pointed out

They have also added spurious charges , not allowed , the Wilkinson case and Recorder Cohen judgment say so !! Lol

So what doe the PCN say and show ? Attach a picture

Olive_j

The date of the SAR shows it was issued on the 3rd but SENT on the 6th. Two working days are allowed for postage. So it would have had to be posted on Thursday 2nd August to be delivered two working days later on Monday 6th. So it wasn’t served within the 14 days required.   

Olive_j

Redx said:

So what doe the PCN say and show ? Attach a picture

Sorry, do you mean their signage? 

It was also a self ticketing carpark: 

Redx

No , not the signage , the postal NTK PCN issued by UK CPM in the post to the RK , when it all kicked off 

Olive_j

Redx said:

No , not the signage , the postal NTK PCN issued by UK CPM in the post to the RK , when it all kicked off 

Ahh. I’ve attached it on the Claim Form comment a couple of messages above. 

Olive_j

2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question but liability is denied. The Defendant denies being the driver of the vehicle on the relevant date.

3.   The Claimant’s Notice to Keeper, dated 03/08/2018, was served outside the period mandated by Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (“POFA”), and is therefore null and of no effect. Consequently, the Claimant is unable to hold the Defendant liable as the vehicle keeper. The Notice alleges that the vehicle was observed at 15:14 on the material date. It does not state a period of parking, which is mandated by Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (“POFA”). The Claimant’s Approved Trade Association, the International Parking Community (“IPC”), mandates that a minimum 10 minute grace period must be allowed before any parking enforcement occurs.

Redx

Ok , now we are getting somewhere because we can see the paperwork , the claim form nor the NTK dont explain what the actual breach was either , from what I can see

Is it forbidding signage ?? Was the driver not authorised to be there ? That may be another factor , but I am liking this new draft so far

FrankCannon

Can you tell us the location of the car park ?

I think the driver may have parked in a place where they were not authorised, so no contract was offered to them. Is there a sign on the ground to the right of the vehicle in the NtK ?

Jenni_D

Date of event: 23-07-2018
NTK must arrive within 14 calendar days, where Day 1 is the day after the event
Therefore the NTK must arrive with the keeper by 06-08-2018 latest

00: 23-07
01: 24-07
02: 25-07
03: 26-07
..
07: 30-07
..
11: 03-08 (Friday)
12: 04-08
13: 05-08
14: 06-08 (Monday)

If it was issued (and put in the post) on 03-08 then it would be deemed delivered on 06-08 ... unless Saturday is not counted as a working postal day (even though it normally is).

Do you have any evidence that confirms when it was posted?

FrankCannon

It's deemed to be delivered 2 business days after posting, which would be the Tuesday - day 15.