Secure Parking Solutions NTK

Castle

Here's one I found earlier from January 2020:-
FISTRAL BEACH, Newquay, Inital Parking.. please help!! - Page 17 — MoneySavingExpert Forum

IhateFines

Coupon-mad said:

Yes, and it's s miscalculation their Lead adjudicator has apologised for before.

It's buried somewhere in the POPLA decisions thread that the Lead Adjudicator apologised that an assessor was just looking at a calendar and counted on 14 days instead of treating 31st as day one, and counting on 13 days.

Maybe one of the regulars can find the apology. He promised the Assessors would be re-trained on that.  I recall we were saying 'POPLA can't count to 14'.

You can then quote it in a formal complaint to POPLA.

Thanks Coupon, I'll try find the apology later today. It shows POPLA are a 1 time deal, so would it be possible to overturn the decision through a formal complaint?

Umkomaas

IhateFines said:

Coupon-mad said:

Yes, and it's s miscalculation their Lead adjudicator has apologised for before.

It's buried somewhere in the POPLA decisions thread that the Lead Adjudicator apologised that an assessor was just looking at a calendar and counted on 14 days instead of treating 31st as day one, and counting on 13 days.

Maybe one of the regulars can find the apology. He promised the Assessors would be re-trained on that.  I recall we were saying 'POPLA can't count to 14'.

You can then quote it in a formal complaint to POPLA.

Thanks Coupon, I'll try find the apology later today. It shows POPLA are a 1 time deal, so would it be possible to overturn the decision through a formal complaint?

Your formal complaint goes to POPLA's Lead Adjudicator John Gallagher. 

This thread will provide you with lots of background detail in how to complain about yet another appalling POPLA decision, one which they've made previously made, and one which their 'Sector Expert' gave the impression would not recur!

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6054477/parked-longer-than-the-maximum-period-allowed/p1

IhateFines

complaints@popla.co.uk
FAO the Lead Adjudicator, John Gallagher.

Dear John Gallagher,

I recently, appealed a PCN through the POPLA Service, and strongly believe procedural errors have resulted in my appeal being refused. This complaint is to bring to your attention a procedural error made by the assessor that has led to an incorrect POPLA appeal decision.

To clarify the NTK is from Secure Parking Solutions LTD for an alleged offence on 30th January 2022. 

The assessor Claire Brackenridge has incorrectly interpreted 14 days from the day after the parking contravention date. I quote the assessors rationale "The operator also sent the NTK to be delivered within the relevant period which is the period of 14 days starting from the day after the contravention. The date of the contravention was 30 January 2022, therefore, the NTK needed to be sent to be delivered by 14 February. The NTK was issued on 10 February which I am satisfied would have given it the opportunity to be delivered by 14 February. It is entirely possible that the NTK did not arrive by this time due to a third-party issue concerning the appellant’s postal delivery service. It is outside of POPLA’s remit to assess any aspect of a third-party issue. As the driver has not been identified, the operator has successfully transferred the liability of the charge to the registered keeper. Accordingly, I must refuse this appeal.

As stated in my appeal; for keeper liability to apply, PoFA 2012 Schedule 4 (paragraph 9, sub-paragraphs 4b & 5) states that a Notice to Keeper must arrive at the Keeper’s address within 14 days beginning with the day after the period of parking ended. The NTK was dated the 10th February 2022 and the operator has provided proof that the NTK was sent on the 10th February 2022 at 17:26:01PM. The NTK did not arrive until the after 14th February 2022 which would make it the 15th day after the 30th January 2022 alleged parking contravention. The main issue which arises is that with the NTK being posted on 10th February 2022 it would not have been possible for it to arrive by the 13th February 2022 (14 day after alleged contravention) and therefore keeper liability cannot arise.

PoFA 2012 states:
(5)The relevant period for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4) is the period of 14 days beginning with the day after that on which the specified period of parking ended.
(6)A notice sent by post is to be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, to have been delivered (and so “given” for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4)) on the second working day after the day on which it is posted; and for this purpose “working day” means any day other than a Saturday, Sunday or a public holiday in England and Wales.

Timeline:

SPS have provided a certificate of postage for the NTK which shows it was sent on the 10/02/2022 at 17:26:01 PM.

31/01/2022 Would be the 1st day after the contravention

1/02/2022 Would be the 2nd day after the contravention

02/02/2022 Would be the 3rd day after the contravention

03/02/2022 Would be the 4th day after the contravention

04/02/2022 Would be the 5th day after the contravention

05/02/2022 Would be the 6th day after the contravention

06/02/2022 Would be the 7th day after the contravention

07/02/2022 Would be the 8th day after the contravention

08/02/2022 Would be the 9th day after the contravention

09/02/2022 Would be the 10th day after the contravention 

10/02/2022 Would be the 11th day after the contravention (NTK was posted this day at 17:26:01PM / POFA 2012 Schedule 4 (paragraph 9, sub-paragraph 6) and the Interpretation Act 1978 timing commences “presumed…to have been delivered…on the second working day after the day on which it is posted”)

11/02/2022 Would be the 12th day after the contravention (First working day after NTK posted)

12/02/2022 Would be the 13th day after the contravention (Saturday is not counted as a working day)

13/02/2022 Would be the 14th day after the contravention (Sunday is not counted as a working day / NTK had to arrive by this day)

14/03/2022 Would be the 15th day after the contravention (Second working day after NTK posted / Date deemed delivered by PoFA Law of this country)

The law (PoFA Schedule 4 para 9[6]) is very clear that .......
(6)A notice sent by post is to be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, to have been delivered (and so “given” for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4)) on the second working day after the day on which it is posted; and for this purpose “working day” means any day other than a Saturday, Sunday or a public holiday in England and Wales.

The 'second working day' was 14/03/2022, and therefore making it day 15, one whole day outside the strict requirements of PoFA (the law of this country). POPLA cannot make any assumptions contrary to the law, doing so not only undermines POPLA's credibility to deal with relatively clear legal points which have important implications for the motorist, but your refusal to overrule your Assessors error, suggests a bias not in the interest of the motorist. 

I urge you to re-examine PoFA Schedule 4 para 9[6] and further reconsider what is now a further compounding of the two earlier procedural errors.

In regards to the timeline; ‘The Interpretation Act’ refers to any Act where documents are sent, served, or given by post, therefore the PoFA is included.

Interpretation Act 1978
Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression “serve” or the expression ” give ” or ” send ” or any other expression is used) then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and, unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.

Practice Direction [1985] 1 All ER 889 states that, unless the contrary is proved, First class mail is deemed delivered on the second working day after posting, and Second class the fourth working day after posting. “Working Day” means Monday to Friday not including Bank Holiday

I’d like to refer to a case in which I have seen on MSE where someone has received an NTK from Euro Car Parks back in 2019. This person like me had their appeal rejected from POPLA, and complained in regards to the continuous failure of the understanding by multiple persons of the compliance with the Protections of Freedoms Act 2012.

The person in question received an email from ‘the Sector Expert’ who confirmed they were wrong and that POPLA have admitted their Assessors need retraining.

A quotation of the received response
‘POFA cases are surprisingly uncommon, and cases where the operator has got it wrong but continues to pursue at POPLA rarer still. It is clear from the example you have provided below that we have some work to do to ensure that the assessors here understand the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 and apply its provisions correctly. I am sorry that your experience of POPLA was not better than it was, but I do appreciate you bringing your concerns to us. I want nothing more than for our assessors to come to the correct decision, so I will personally ensure that these assessors receive feedback and training to ensure that such mistakes are not repeated.’

These errors are placing the motorist, unfairly in danger of being sued in the courts by these scammers!

The above complaint is THREE YEARS OLD, where POPLA admitted they couldn't add up to 14 and that your assessors needed retraining in 2019. So why in 2022 are POPLA assessors making the same glaring error, even when the appellants comments spelt out the timeline in words of one syllable, line by line? There is only ONE law they need to understand and ONE 14 day period. Its not rocket science. 

Coupon-mad

Just change stuff about the 2019 complaint case into the past tense.

I'd point out that's a THREE YEAR OLD complaint, where POPLA admitted they couldn't add up to 14 and that their assessors needed retraining. In 2019.

So why in 2022 are POPLA assessors making the same glaring error, even when the appellant's comments spelt out the timeline in words of one syllable, line by line?  There is only ONE law they need to understand and ONE 14 day period.  It's not rocket science.

Are they all just blithely looking at a calendar and 'counting forward' two weeks again, as the sector expert admitted had happened in error, three years ago? Why haven't new assessors been properly trained?

Le_Kirk

IhateFines said:

The assessor Claire Brackenridge has incorrectly interpreted 14 days from the day after the parking contravention date. I quote the assessors rational "The operator also sent the NTK to be delivered within the relevant period which is the period of 14 days starting from the day after the contravention. 

Despite it being used in the POPLA answer to you, the use of "rational" is wrong and it should be "rationale".  They cannot count and they cannot use correct English grammar!

IhateFines

Coupon-mad said:

Just change stuff about the 2019 complaint case into the past tense.

I'd point out that's a THREE YEAR OLD complaint, where POPLA admitted they couldn't add up to 14 and that their assessors needed retraining. In 2019.

So why in 2022 are POPLA assessors making the same glaring error, even when the appellant's comments spelt out the timeline in words of one syllable, line by line?  There is only ONE law they need to understand and ONE 14 day period.  It's not rocket science.

Are they all just blithely looking at a calendar and 'counting forward' two weeks again, as the sector expert admitted had happened in error, three years ago? Why haven't new assessors been properly trained?

Le_Kirk said:

IhateFines said:

The assessor Claire Brackenridge has incorrectly interpreted 14 days from the day after the parking contravention date. I quote the assessors rational "The operator also sent the NTK to be delivered within the relevant period which is the period of 14 days starting from the day after the contravention. 

Despite it being used in the POPLA answer to you, the use of "rational" is wrong and it should be "rationale".  They cannot count and they cannot use correct English grammar!

I have made both changes above in italics if you guys could check please. Also, would the complaint be filled on the POPLA website through their complaints form or would I use complaints@popla.co.uk addressing it to John Gallagher. 

Furthermore, would it also be useful to make a complain to BPA as Secure Parking Solutions Ltd are one of their approved operators. 

Coupon-mad

I'd email it to complaints@popla.co.uk addressing it to John Gallagher. 

No point complaining to the BPA about POPLA not being able to count to 14 (again).  Can you if want to be fobbed off.

1505grandad

"Dear John Gallaghar," ?

Coupon-mad

Good spot!  His name must be spelt right.