Civil Enforcement Ltd

outraged_

We received a PCN from Civil Enforcement for supposedly parking illegally. Initially we thought this is rubbish, it was a public car park that we entered at 17:57 and from 6pm was free of charge. 
There is no correct information of where it is and what the supposed infringement is, nor any photos of the signs.
Our first appeal was to say the above that from6pm it was FOC.
This morning there was a response to our appeal, however the link they sent does not work and we have no way of reading their response. There is no number or email address that we can contact them via, so I was forced to send a message through the appeal section saying exactly that.

Any other ideas of what we should do? Below is the "PCN" without any personal details. If anyone has any ideas of what to do next I will be extremely grateful!

t anuy 

Fruitcake

You should not use the word illegal. 
They are claiming a breach of contract, an unlawful civil event, not a criminal one. 

Was the driver's identity revealed in the initial appeal? I hope not because the NTK is not PoFA compliant and therefore the keeper can never be held liable.

I suggest you complain direct to CEL and the BPA, but of course Plan A is always a complaint to the landowner an the keeper's MP. DO NOT PHONE ANYONE.

When you get the rejection and PoPLA code, show us your draft appeal before you submit it.

Lack of grace periods/breach of BPA CoP will be some of the main appeal points to use. Motorists are supposed to be given time to enter, read the signs, and decide if they wish to park. The parking contract is not formed until that time.

Was there a requirement to enter a VRM to obtain free parking?

Note that the NTK states that the site is for permit holders only. You need to see what the signs say about permits and how to obtain one. (A permit can be a pay and display ticket).

Get photos of the site and signage ready to include in your PoPLA appeal.

I've just had a look at Google Streetview and there is a sign next to number 86 saying free customer car park at the rear. Is that the location perhaps?

19 Parkfield Rd - Google Maps

outraged_

Hi Thanks for the reply. I don't think the driver's identity was revealed no, and it was a hire van. They probably sent it to the hire company, that then forwarded to us (a company). So should my appeal say something along the lines that they don't know who the driver is?

Initially I appealed based on the times, as explained, now we think it may have been a different car park, as there are designated parking bays for different things. But as I said, the main problem now is that I can't access their response!!

This is what we sent, but it appears the ringo charges are for the council, and the council would not send a PCN by civil enforcement would they.

outraged_

I now managed to open their response, which is what I later suspected, that it was for a different provider. I didn't specifically say who the driver was, but they have used my name in the correspondence. Can I still appeal to POPLA to allege there is no keeper's liability? Also, there are no exact details of where this was, who owns the land or any picture of the signs. I can allege this is what I found online that it was for ringo. 

We have no record of a payment made for the above vehicle registration on the day in question.

Please be advised that the evidence provided is from a different payment provider and is not valid
in the

above car park. Signs at this location clearly state that payment for parking must be made at the

machine.

It is the responsibility of the driver to ensure they adhere to the parking terms. There are many clear and

visible signs displayed on the site advising drivers of the regulations in force and we maintain a

continuous log confirming that the signage remains in place.

It is therefore our position that the Parking Charge was validly issued because of the above detailed

breach of the terms and conditions set out on signs in the car park. You have now reached the end of

our internal appeals procedure.

outraged_

Oh, sorry for bombarding.

Now I just noticed that not just they can't prove who the driver is, it was issued way after the 14 days.

The alleged breach of contract was on the 18th of March and the issue day is 13th of April, clearly stated on their letter.

Surely that will win at POPLA?

B789

Have you received a "Notice to Hirer"? If all you've received is a copy or the original PCN, it isn't PoFA compliant and the Hirer cannot be held liable. Only the driver, whose identity, hopefully, is unknown and there is no legal obligation to provide it.

outraged_

B789 said:

Have you received a "Notice to Hirer"? If all you've received is a copy or the original PCN, it isn't PoFA compliant and the Hirer cannot be held liable. Only the driver, whose identity, hopefully, is unknown and there is no legal obligation to provide it.

I've no idea, I think it's the copy of the original PCN. You can see in my first post as I put a copy.
Secondly, it clearly states that the incident was on 18/02 and the issue date is 13/04 so surely that's sufficient as well to cancel this?

Coupon-mad

outraged_ said:

Oh, sorry for bombarding.

Now I just noticed that not just they can't prove who the driver is, it was issued way after the 14 days.

The alleged breach of contract was on the 18th of March and the issue day is 13th of April, clearly stated on their letter.

Surely that will win at POPLA?

Slow down, this is not true with a hire case.  Yours is a NTH not a NTK.  But you will win.

Just copy any other NTH POPLA appeal.  Search the forum. There will also be some NTH cases last year, in the POPLA DECISIONS thread.  

Umkomaas

Secondly, it clearly states that the incident was on 18/02 

Nope, it clearly states 18/03. 

Fruitcake

There is a council car park near the one to which I provided a GSV link in my previous post, as well as a private pub car park next door. Please confirm you know which car park you are talking about as it may have cropped up here before.

Have you received a Notice to Hirer from CEL, or has the hire/lease company stupidly just forwarded the NTK to you? If the former, then you should appeal to PoPLA (Assuming you have a PoPLA code).
If the latter, the hirer/lessee cannot be held liable, but you need to be careful because if they fail to transfer liability to you they may decide to pay the charge and then charge you for the privilege. You would then be in the realms of invoking a charge-back and all the grief that goes with it. They need to do this no matter what.

You need to ask the hire/lease company if they informed CEL of the hirer's details. If they haven't, then you need to tell them that they are liable for the charge until they do. Also tell them they must not pay the charge and bill you for it.

They cannot know who was driving unless you tell them or an employee was present and witnessed the event. They only know the hirer's details otherwise. Do not reveal the driver's identity.


Assuming you have a PoPLA code, and you are sure the driver was not identified in the initial appeal, (even though you have told the whole world in this forum that parking companies read enough information for them to identify the driver), then you should use all the standard PoPLA appeal points you will find in the third post of the NEWBIES.
First though you should edit your post about who was driving.

If the vehicle was permitted to be at the site, then Plan A is still a complaint to the landowner and the hirer's MP. If they were not permitted to park there then it would be unwise to let the landowner know this.

Your appeal should begin with this being a hire/lease vehicle and the hirer/lessee was not driving.
The NTH (if you have one) was not PoFA complaint and is therefore incapable of holding the hirer/lessee liable. (It will have failed to comply with paragraphs 13 and 14 of the PoFA 2012.

Then all the standard PoPLA appeal points including but not limited to: -

Not the landowner
No standing to issue charges in their own name
Inadequate signage
NTK fails to comply with the PoFA so the hire/lease company cannot be held liable
Inadequate signage
BPA CoP failures

outraged_

Fruitcake said:

There is a council car park near the one to which I provided a GSV link in my previous post, as well as a private pub car park next door. Please confirm you know which car park you are talking about as it may have cropped up here before.

Have you received a Notice to Hirer from CEL, or has the hire/lease company stupidly just forwarded the NTK to you? If the former, then you should appeal to PoPLA (Assuming you have a PoPLA code).
If the latter, the hirer/lessee cannot be held liable, but you need to be careful because if they fail to transfer liability to you they may decide to pay the charge and then charge you for the privilege. You would then be in the realms of invoking a charge-back and all the grief that goes with it. They need to do this no matter what.

You need to ask the hire/lease company if they informed CEL of the hirer's details. If they haven't, then you need to tell them that they are liable for the charge until they do. Also tell them they must not pay the charge and bill you for it.

They cannot know who was driving unless you tell them or an employee was present and witnessed the event. They only know the hirer's details otherwise. Do not reveal the driver's identity.


Assuming you have a PoPLA code, and you are sure the driver was not identified in the initial appeal, (even though you have told the whole world in this forum that parking companies read enough information for them to identify the driver), then you should use all the standard PoPLA appeal points you will find in the third post of the NEWBIES.
First though you should edit your post about who was driving.

If the vehicle was permitted to be at the site, then Plan A is still a complaint to the landowner and the hirer's MP. If they were not permitted to park there then it would be unwise to let the landowner know this.

Your appeal should begin with this being a hire/lease vehicle and the hirer/lessee was not driving.
The NTH (if you have one) was not PoFA complaint and is therefore incapable of holding the hirer/lessee liable. (It will have failed to comply with paragraphs 13 and 14 of the PoFA 2012.

Then all the standard PoPLA appeal points including but not limited to: -

Not the landowner
No standing to issue charges in their own name
Inadequate signage
NTK fails to comply with the PoFA so the hire/lease company cannot be held liable
Inadequate signage
BPA CoP failures

Thanks for the tip, it's all edited.

Can you please confirm that if my appeal suggests someone was the driver, then all of the above is null and void? I know for sure there was no clear statement of who the driver was, but when we did the initial appeal we thought it was a RingGo location, but turns out it was a private car park. None of that is clear on the PCN.

It was the former, the company received a PCN from the CEL. The issue date on the PCN is 13/04 and the incident happened on 18/03. The hirer company did not pay anything, they would have just passed the liability to our company.