Britannia Parking non-POFA compliance

B789

As the registered keeper of the vehicle in question, I have received a PCN from Britannia. I was not the driver and can prove I was elsewhere in the country at the time of the alleged contravention. The driver could be any of a number of people. As far as I can make out, the PCN is NOT POFA 2012 compliant as it does not include para. 9 (f).

I am about to appeal the PCN but do not really want to include the non-relevant content as striken through below. Is this advisable?

Re PCN number:

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. You must include a close up actual photograph of the sign you contend was at the location on the material date as well as your images of the vehicle.

The front page of the PCN states "If you were the driver at the time of the event you are required to pay or appeal the parking charge". As I was not the driver at the time, can I presume that I am not really required to do anything?

I attach redacted copies of the notice for reference and any comment from the esteemed guardians of the forum.

Umkomaas

You're correct, the NtK is not PoFA compliant as per your observation above. Why they have issued such a non-compliant NtK is a bit mistifying as they have easily met the 14 day timescale. Still ... that's their problem. 

Yes, okay to exclude the sentences above, but add a couple to the effect that their NtK is non-compliant with PoFA, you were categorically not the driver, you have no requirement placed on you to name the driver, and you will not be doing so. Cancel the charge forthwith, but should they not do this and continue corresponding with you (or any third party on their behalf) you will immediately raise a complaint with the DVLA and ICO for their misuse of your personal data, beaching the regulations of the DPA/GDPR, following which you will be issuing a Letter Before Claim as a precursor to suing for compensation through the county court for the breach. 

B789

Just to add... I have evidence that I was crossing the Dartford Tunnel northbound at 13:15, 80 miles away, that day which is 38 minutes after the vehicle is shown leaving the car-park.

Do I mention this in my appeal at this stage or do I just leave the wording from the template (with or without the strike through bits mentioned above)?

Fruitcake

Britannia are playing Billy Suggers and pretending that the keeper can't appeal.

Send the template in blue from the NEWBIES, unaltered, from the keeper save for a one liner that the keeper was not the driver and the NTK is non PoFA compliant, meaning that the keeper cannot be held liable.
Save everything else for PoPLA.

Get pics of the site and signage in readiness.

What happened when you complained to the landowner?

Have you complained to your MP yet?

You should complain to the BPA about the predatory wording of the NTK that does not tell the keeper they can appeal, and that it says the keeper should tell the PPC the name of the driver. That is a lie. There is no such requirement. The PoFA says a keeper may be invited to name the driver, not that they should name the driver.

Umkomaas

B789 said:

Just to add... I have evidence that I was crossing the Dartford Tunnel northbound at 13:15, 80 miles away, that day which is 38 minutes after the vehicle is shown leaving the car-park.

Do I mention this in my appeal at this stage or do I just leave the wording from the template (with or without the strike through bits mentioned above)?

You could do which should give them no wriggle room (but don't necessarily expect common-sense to break out!).  

B789

Appeal submitted with the following:

Re PCN number: XXXXXX

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 to your client landowner.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. You must include a close up actual photograph of the sign you contend was at the location on the material date as well as your images of the vehicle.

Your parking charge Notice to Keeper is non-compliant with PoFA 2012, and I was categorically not the driver and I have no requirement placed on me to name the driver, and I will not be doing so.

Cancel the charge forthwith, but should you not do this and continue corresponding with me (or any third party on your behalf) I will immediately raise a complaint with the DVLA and ICO for your misuse of my personal data, beaching the regulations of the DPA/GDPR, following which I will be issuing a Letter Before Claim as a precursor to suing for compensation through the county court for the breach.

patient_dream

Everything said above is correct.

See how they reply. 
Landowner cancellation is advised especially as they issue non POFA compliant tickets

The other thing you need to discover is their right to issue tickets. Britannia have different companies as you can see in this link to companies house
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/officers/RHPBpZJHOsN21zDn5VXHggkxTLo/appointments

As each company is an entity in their own right, from landowner contractss to parking signs and tickets, they must be the same entity

We have seen before Britannia and the crossover of entities and well worth looking at

B789

I've written to Waitrose advising them of my displeasure at being issued a non-PoFA 2012 compliant PCN and asking them to cancel it. In the appeal to the PPC I've asked for photographic evidence of the signage, meaning the contractual wording.

As I am not liable to name the driver, I'm not sure how far they want this to go. The threat of complaints to the DVLA and ICO for DPA/GDPR breaches mentioned in the appeal and the complaint to Waitrose should alert them to potential issues should they not cancel the PCN.

What worries me is the number of sheeple who would just pay up without questioning any of it.

Coupon-mad

What worries me is the number of sheeple who would just pay up without questioning any of it.

Which is why we do what we do!

I've been here some 15 years now, and due to that experience and the millions of views to the Newbies thread, I was appointed to represent consumers on the Govt Steering group that formulated the new statutory Code of Practice coming in.  We are making a real difference here.

KeithP

B789 said:

Just to add... I have evidence that I was crossing the Dartford Tunnel northbound at 13:15, 80 miles away, that day which is 38 minutes after the vehicle is shown leaving the car-park.

Just curious... how can you prove that?

Le_Kirk

The OP can perhaps prove his car was but did not have to be in it innit!