UKPC Parking Charge Notice issued with wrong VRM on the notice.

Coupon-mad

Yup.  Or hoping people rush to appeal in writing, all excited because they think the PCN is void & don't research it first...and of course, they blab all about who was driving!

Boat_to_Bolivia

Crafty, conniving, devious, scamming bar stewards that they are! 

nili170

Le_Kirk said:

In your letter you state a "NTD for a completely different vehicle was left on your vehicle"  Did you mean "on THE vehicle"?

I am the keeper of the vehicle - so the NTD is on my vehicle? does it matter if I say "my" vehicle or "the" vehicle

nili170

Thank you all for the feedback - I will incorporate the advice and post a revised version on here later this morning. Really appreciate the help 

Le_Kirk

nili170 said:

Le_Kirk said:

In your letter you state a "NTD for a completely different vehicle was left on your vehicle"  Did you mean "on THE vehicle"?

I am the keeper of the vehicle - so the NTD is on my vehicle? does it matter if I say "my" vehicle or "the" vehicle

No but you stated "your" vehicle.

nili170

So the revised letter thanks to all your support and help is drafter below. Please let me know your opinions. Thank you in advance all 

Dear Sirs,

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.

I have just received your Notice to Keeper XXXXXXXXXXX for vehicle VRM LS60 XXX.

As no Notice to Driver for correct VRM was left on vehicle registration LS60 XXX, the Notice to Keeper is incapable of holding the keeper liable on accordance with paragraph 8 of Schedule 4 of The Protection Of Freedoms Act (PoFA) 2012. The Notice to Keeper also arrived too late to hold the keeper liable in accordance to Paragraph 9 (4) Schedule 4 of the PoFA Act which prescribes delivery of the Notice to Keeper within 14 days (Note: the 14 days starts the day after the date of the alleged parking event).

UKPC also failed to comply with the requirements Section 7 Notice to Driver (windscreen PCN) which stipulates the following:

7(1)A notice which is to be relied on as a notice to driver for the purposes of paragraph 6(1).(a). is given in accordance with this paragraph if the following requirements are met.

(2)The notice must

(a) specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;

A piece of litter with "incorrect VRM" was left on the car (as seen in the photos UKPC uploaded), but since this is not the keeper's vehicle VRM it does not constitute a valid NTD.
The NTK has the same PCRN as the NTD for someone else's vehicle that was left as litter on vehicle LS60 XXX. Thus, the Notice to Driver is also void. UKPC cannot, transfer liability for the alleged charge from the driver at the time to the keeper.

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

Any further communication with me on this matter, apart from confirmation of no further action and my details being removed from your records, will be considered vexatious and harassment. This includes communication from any Debt Collection companies you care to instruct.

Yours faithfully,

Keeper of the vehicle.

----

Also, am I right to understand that the keying area in this situation is considered minor – therefore I cannot claim £20 for admin costs?

nili170

Fruitcake said:

Sorry, I thought the VRM on the NTK was incorrect as well.

That being the case, your appeal is mostly okay but you need to state that since no NTD for "correct" VRM was left on the vehicle, then the NTK is incapable of holding the keeper liable in accordance with para 8 of the PoFA, and arrived too late to hold the keeper liable in accordance with para 9 of the PoFA 2012.

Add that a piece of litter with "incorrect VRM" was left on the car, but since this is not the keeper's vehicle VRM then it cannot constitute a valid NTD.
Do mention the NTK carries the same PCN ref number as the NTD for someone else's vehicle that was left as litter on your vehicle. 

I do like the idea of quoting the BPA's CoP back to them about  a major keying error having occurred and therefore the PPC should pay you the BPA's going rate of £20 to cover your admin costs.

Save the evidence for PoPLA.

This is after Plan A has been attempted.

I still think you should complaint to the BPA and the DVLA.

Make sure that the driver's identity is not revealed. Do everything as the registered keeper.

I cant see your previous post in which you suggested how to go about complaining to BPA and DVLA. If its covered somewhere else please let me know. Thank you in advance.

B789

nili170 said:

Also, am I right to understand that the keying area in this situation is considered minor – therefore I cannot claim £20 for admin costs?

No. That was a joke/sarcasm about how the PPCs normally try to get away with an "admin" charge for a minor keying error by their victims.

Le_Kirk

As no Notice to Driver for correct VRM was left on vehicle registration LS60 XXX, the Notice to Keeper is incapable of holding the keeper liable on in accordance with paragraph 8 of Schedule 4 of The Protection Of Freedoms Act (PoFA) 2012.

One correction suggested above.

nili170

Le_Kirk said:

As no Notice to Driver for correct VRM was left on vehicle registration LS60 XXX, the Notice to Keeper is incapable of holding the keeper liable on in accordance with paragraph 8 of Schedule 4 of The Protection Of Freedoms Act (PoFA) 2012.

One correction suggested above.

Well spotted!