APCOA NTK - template letter request

KeithP

H_mom said:

KeithP said:

The mention of 'byelaw 14' points towards a railway station car park.
Which car park?

It is not possible to transfer any driver's liability to a keeper when a car park covered by Byelaws is used. This means that it is most important that the driver's identity is not given away.

Yes - it's a railway station car park (Basingstoke Station North Yard (ANPR))

It says an offence was committed by breaching Byelaw 14 and as such they've contacted DVLA to establish we are the registered keeper and therefore we are legally liable.

That car park has been mentioned before on this forum. Can't remember the details but might be worth a search.

They are wrong to say the registered keeper is in any way liable on land covered by byelaws.
The owner can be liable, but it can never be assumed that the registered keeper is the owner of any vehicle.
There is no register of vehicle owners.
In fact, the front of my vehicle's registration document explicitly states in the biggest letters on that page:

THIS DOCUMENT IS NOT PROOF OF OWNERSHIP.

B789

H_mom said:
Under the heading of PENALTY NOTICE it says 'Creditor: APCOA Parking (UK) Ltd' which I read about on one of the posts here but I'm not sure I understood the nuance of it - is it relevant to an appeal?

Easily defeated as per Newbies/FAQ and advice given above.

I have to question the experts, if it is a "Penalty"CN, how can APCOA be the "creditor"? I thought that the "creditor" in any byelaws case would be the public purse because it would go to magistrate court, not county court. (Time for a bit more education)

(Don't worry OP, I'm just seeking some legal clarification. This will never actually get to any court)

KeithP

As I said earlier, this car park has featured here before.

Here is that earlier thread...
APCOA managed camera monitored railway station parking session

Umkomaas

I have to question the experts, if it is a "Penalty"CN, how can APCOA be the "creditor"? I thought that the "creditor" in any byelaws case would be the public purse because it would go to magistrate court, not county court. (Time for a bit more education)

Exactly. I thought you'd be aware by now that PPCs conflate laws and regulations to their own advantage, hoping the punter is naive and will be intimidated into paying. We have never seen one of their silly 'penalty' notices getting anywhere with those who come here for advice, but there will be significantly more who just cough up in fear of the crap that APCOA spout and make sound serious and 'law-breaking' to bring them profit. 

PS - I think your inputs to the forum are great and your presence here has added further strength to our fight against this skimming sector. 👍

PPS - I don't consider myself to be 'an expert', rather someone who utterly abhors the intimidation and harassment meted out by PPCs to often vulnerable people in their pursuit of self enrichment, and who is someone who is prepared to put in the hard yards to research this stuff over the past 10+ years and offer up what I've got to know!  But you do learn a bit in that one tenth of a century! 😄

Coupon-mad

There's another APCOA station thread right next to this one right now with a POPLA appeal already written and submitted on day 33.

The OP should read that because the point to take on board is, the appeal will not win but in these APCOA railway byelaw cases they are not designed to win...and it matters not!

It is just about slowly timing it out.  Not about beating it.  No worries.

B789

Umkomaas said:
Exactly. I thought you'd be aware by now that PPCs conflate laws and regulations to their own advantage, hoping the punter is naive and will be intimidated into paying. We have never seen one of their silly 'penalty' notices getting anywhere with those who come here for advice, but there will be significantly more who just cough up in fear of the crap that APCOA spout and make sound serious and 'law-breaking' to bring them profit. 

Thank you for the clarification. Whilst we expect this sort of underhand behaviour to be prevented with the upcoming DLUHC PPCoP and we know that APCOA are benign when it comes to actually issuing court claims, is there any way that they can be reprimanded or sanctioned for this activity, in particular for breaches of the CRA? Is it not also a criminal/fraudulent act to misrepresent oneself and demand money in this way. For example, in the USA (I know, I know) anything that can be considered illegal and has made use of the US Mail, is considered a felony under Federal statute. That is how many serious criminals in the US are "hooked". It's just a pity that we don't have anything similar here that raises any criminality to a more serious level.

H_mom

Thank you all so much for taking the time to reply and offer your words of wisdom and share your experience/expertise - it has helped me put together an appeal on behalf of the keeper of the vehicle - a young, recently widowed mother whose husband was a lawyer, wouldn't you know. I'm sure he would have loved getting his teeth into this!

I have shared your experiences and advice with her about riding it out for 6 months and buying time but she is anxious and isn't sure the stress is worth it - she is concerned that not paying it will affect her credit scores or result in CCJs or equivalent - will it? 

Finally, the hard copy letter referred to a Penalty Charge of £50 if paid in 14 days from date of letter (4th April)  increasing to £85, which would be 18th April.  But today the on-line form which refers to a Parking Charge says pay £50 before 27th April otherwise it will increase.  If 26th April is the end of the 14 day reduced-charge period, then the countdown started 12th April which was the date the letter was received (maybe it was tracked?)...which is 18 days after the parking event occurred.  Does this help? 

Thank you again for your help.

Coupon-mad

The date the letter arrived doesn't help either way; just time it out as advised.

Please stop looking at the discount like it's a bargain.  No-one here will say to pay an APCOA penalty notice.

I have shared your experiences and advice with her about riding it out for 6 months and buying time but she is anxious and isn't sure the stress is worth it - she is concerned that not paying it will affect her credit scores or result in CCJs or equivalent - will it? 

Impossible.  Penalty notices cannot.

B789

@H_mom, please reassure the victim of this scam that she could never get a CCJ or any harm to her credit rating just by having a private parking charge notice. It sounds as though she is gearing up to pay this off.

The only way she could get a CCJ would be if this ever got to court, which it won't, and then she lost the case and then didn't bother paying the CCJ within 30 days. Anyone who receives a CCJ and pays it within 30 days has no record of it, ever, remaining on their credit file. It is a misconception, thanks to our lacklustre education system, that many people think that anything to do with "court" is somehow reflected on their credit file. Some people even think that "court" means a Judge and barristers in wigs with all the trimmings. It is nothing of the sort as this is only a civil matter, nothing criminal about it, except the scamming parking company.

However, tell her that we are dealing with APCOA here and I don't think they have taken anyone to court for many years. They are benign. It is easy to get this "timed out" by stringing it along for 6 months when it is then cancelled by statute of limitation. Just respond to any comms at the last possible moment as described in the Newbies/FAQ thread.

APCOA rely on gullible victims relying on poor education about our legal system and pooping their pants at the thought of "court" and so paying up. Sadly, there are far many more that do than don't, which is why they are unlikely to waste their money chasing this to court where they are unlikely to win.

H_mom

Yes - I fear she is gearing up to paying this off but I will pass on your advice and knowledge and see if I can’t convince her to stand her ground. 

Thanks again for taking the time to reply.