Napier Parking/BW Legal parking charge

ChrisA7979

B789 said:

@ChrisA7979 you must read, re-read and read again the Newbies thread near the top of this forum as you need to fully educate yourself on the process and the steps required to defend any claim. You will get assistance from the regular on here but it is always best to help yourself so we can also help you.

Is the letter from BW Legal a Letter of/before Claim? Does it give you 14 or 30 days to respond?

Whilst the PCN states at the top that it is issued under POFA, does it have on the back the actual POFA wording as required by the act? The statement on the top does not make it so just because it is there. Do not give away the identity of the driver because of it isn't POFA compliant then they cannot transfer liability to the driver, who is unknown to them.

Hi - this is the reverse of the initial PCN so I assume the last paragraph confirms they're POFA compliant?

Coupon-mad

Not at all, that's just an instruction to lease/hire firms, not wording set out in Schedule 4. 

B789

ChrisA7979 said:
Hi - this is the reverse of the initial PCN so I assume the last paragraph confirms they're POFA compliant?

Spot the difference... Does your notice quote PoFA 2012 EXACTLY, as required under the Act?

PoFA 2012 S4 p9(2)(f):

You are advised that if, after 28 days from the date given (which is presumed to be the second working day after the date issued), the parking charge has not been paid in full and we do not know both the name and current address of the driver, we, PPC NAME (the creditor) have the right to recover any unpaid part of the parking charge from you. This notice is given to you under paragraph 9(2)(f) of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and is subject to our complying with the applicable conditions under Schedule 4 of the Act. Failure to pay the full amount of this notice within 28 days may result in the proceeding of debt recovery action and/or issuing court proceedings against you.

Schedule 4 p7 is VERY specific. 

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4/enacted

ChrisA7979

B789 said:

ChrisA7979 said:
Hi - this is the reverse of the initial PCN so I assume the last paragraph confirms they're POFA compliant?

Spot the difference... Does your notice quote PoFA 2012 EXACTLY, as required under the Act?

PoFA 2012 S4 p9(2)(f):

You are advised that if, after 28 days from the date given (which is presumed to be the second working day after the date issued), the parking charge has not been paid in full and we do not know both the name and current address of the driver, we, PPC NAME (the creditor) have the right to recover any unpaid part of the parking charge from you. This notice is given to you under paragraph 9(2)(f) of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and is subject to our complying with the applicable conditions under Schedule 4 of the Act. Failure to pay the full amount of this notice within 28 days may result in the proceeding of debt recovery action and/or issuing court proceedings against you.

Schedule 4 p7 is VERY specific. 

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4/enacted

I'll have a look into the information you provided - very useful - thanks

ChrisA7979

First Draft - (This will be placed into the template) - Is the POFA argument relevant in my case? Any advice is welcome? Thanks

 

The Defendant was issued with a Claim Form by BW Legal acting on behalf of the Claimant Napier Parking Limited for a Total amount of £248.86 (inclusive of £35 Court Fee & £50 Legal representative's costs). Through research, the Defendant has come to understand that this relates to a PCN that was issued against the Defendant’s vehicle ***REG**** over 6 months ago on the 20th September 2022 at ****Address*****.

It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question but liability is denied. The identity of the driver at the material time is unknown to the Defendant. The Defendant was not the only insured driver of the vehicle in question and is unable to recall who was or was not driving on an unremarkable day over 6 months ago.

The Defendant believes that the Notice to Keeper was not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ('PoFA'), and therefore incapable of holding the keeper liable with the ‘keeper liability’ requirements set out in the PoFA, Schedule 4.

It is averred that the Claimant has failed to provide an adequate Consideration Period prior to delivering a Parking Charge Notice, as is required for all members of the International Parking Community (Code of Practise - Section 13.1 Consideration and Grace Periods on Private Land) – an Accredited Trade Association whose members include the Claimant. In this case, the time from first witnessing the car to placing a Parking Charge Notice on the windscreen was less than 1 minute. It is therefore denied that the analysis of parking signage or payment could possibly have been completed without adequate time for consideration, thus voiding any such contract in keeping with Schedule 2, Paragraph 10 of the Consumer Rights Act.

KeithP

ChrisA7979 said:

The Defendant was issued with a Claim Form by BW Legal acting on behalf of the Claimant Napier Parking Limited for a Total amount of £248.86 (inclusive of £35 Court Fee & £50 Legal representative's costs). Through research, the Defendant has come to understand that this relates to a PCN that was issued against the Defendant’s vehicle ***REG**** over 6 months ago on the 20th September 2022 at ****Address*****.

That bit isn't needed.
It is on the Claim Form and both the Judge and the Claimant (who wrote the Claim Form) already know that.

Coupon-mad

This was only 7 months ago, so no Judge is likely to believe that you don't know who was driving.  Do not say that, if it's untrue.

ChrisA7979

Coupon-mad said:

This was only 7 months ago, so no Judge is likely to believe that you don't know who was driving.  Do not say that, if it's untrue.

Hi - Ok I'll just expand on the consideration period element - thanks

ChrisA7979

Received my SAR back from Napier Parking - unfortunately after I've had to submit my defence. But just to highlight they'll say anything to try and scam the public - here are the "Notes" the Napier employee wrote - 

Never smoked in my life and have never purchased tobacco!

What it hopefully does is help with my Consideration Period argument if it gets to court.

Boat_to_Bolivia

The SAR is more useful at WS stage than for your defence.