North Greenwich TFL Car Park NCP PCN

Stakkertoo

The 'PCN' contravention they've used is "Not Parked Correctly and liability for the same having been brought to the attention of the driver by clear signage". I logged into their site to recover the extra photos and they have included one of a sign with a page of small print listing terms and conditions. 

I should also add that cars park on these end islands every day and I went to the same location days later and photographed around 20 cars also 'not parked correctly', reflecting the same conditions the driver experienced on the day in question.

Coupon-mad

Anything will do as long as the keeper appeals and doesn't imply who parked. Non-POFA at an NCP station car park so no keeper liability.

Stakkertoo

Coupon-mad said:

Anything will do as long as the keeper appeals and doesn't imply who parked. Non-POFA at an NCP station car park so no keeper liability.

Having got this from another webste, would this be the best approach? 

Dear Sirs,

I have just received your Parking Charge Notice to Keeper xxxxx for vehicle VRM xxxx

The land is subject to byelaws and as such is not relevant land for the purpose of keeper liability under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA ) and I cannot be held liable.

Even if it were relevant land then you have failed to comply with the requirements of Schedule 4 of The Protection Of Freedoms Act 2012 namely, but not limited to, to give the notice of keeper liability in the format prescribed by section 9 (2) (f) of the Act. You cannot, therefore, transfer liability for the alleged charge from the driver at the time to me, the keeper.

There is no legal requirement to name the driver at the time and I will not be doing so.

I do not expect to hear from you again, or your debt collectors, except to confirm that no further action will be taken on this matter and my personal details have been removed from your records.

Yours etc

KeithP

The land is subject to byelaws...

Is that right?

Even if it were relevant land then you have failed to comply with the requirements of Schedule 4 of The Protection Of Freedoms Act 2012 namely, but not limited to, to give the notice of keeper liability in the format prescribed by section 9 (2) (f) of the Act. 

Have they failed to do that?

Stakkertoo

KeithP said:

The land is subject to byelaws...

Is that right?

The parking charge NTK was from NCP but the car park is a TFL London Underground station site, adminstered by NCP. 

KeithP said:

Even if it were relevant land then you have failed to comply with the requirements of Schedule 4 of The Protection Of Freedoms Act 2012 namely, but not limited to, to give the notice of keeper liability in the format prescribed by section 9 (2) (f) of the Act. 

Have they failed to do that?

On further inspection they do mention this: 

KeithP

Stakkertoo said:

KeithP said:

The land is subject to byelaws...

Is that right?

The parking charge NTK was from NCP but the car park is a TFL London Underground station site, adminstered by NCP. 

That's great. Well spotted. All London Underground station car parks are subject to railway byelaws.

Stakkertoo

I'm going to send the appeal. Thanks!  

Coupon-mad

Yes that appeal is fine, sounds like it came from pepipoo which is good.

D_P_Dance

Have you complained to your MP?

Stakkertoo

D_P_Dance said:

Have you complained to your MP?

I have not. Is this a thing?

D_P_Dance

It is definitely to be encouraged.