Premier Park Parking Charge Notice - St George’s Gravesend

Bbyoda

Hi, I received a PCN and have appealed it as from the photos displayed it is not clear who the driver is and my car isn’t used just by myself. I appealed using the template set out that I found on this forum but not sure what I need to do next as they have replied today with the following which I’m assuming is generic. Do I just need to pay it as I’m the registered keeper and can’t provide them with driver details? I have also attached the original fine.

”We write to acknowledge receipt of your recent online appeal, on behalf of the driver, appealing against the issuing of a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) to the vehicle.

We note your comments and must refer you to the Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA) 2012, Schedule 4 - Recovery of unpaid Parking Charges. This is available to view online at:                                         

We now therefore request that the details of the driver of the vehicle at the time of the contravention are supplied; this must include their full name and serviceable postal address.  If you are unwilling or unable to provide these details the registered keeper of this vehicle will remain liable for this PCN.  This information should be provided by 30thMay 2023.  Please note, Premier Park Limited will not reply to any correspondence until after the above date, if the requested information is not provided.                                    

If we do not receive this information by the above date, the appeal will be formally responded to and we will hold you liable as the Registered Keeper of the vehicle on the date of the contravention.

Please note if we receive correspondence from the driver at the time of the incident we will not respond to you further on this matter. “

 

KeithP

Hello and welcome.

Ignore that letter and wait patiently for your appeal to be rejected.
You will then need to file a PoPLA appeal as described in the third post of the NEWBIES thread.

Have you complained the St Georges Centre about this and because you are a valued customer, sought their help in overturning the PCN?

On the face of it, it looks like the driver parked there for about twenty-four minutes without paying. Is that right?

B789

Utter male bovine testicles from Premier Parking. They cannot invoke PoFA after issuing the PCN.

If you appealed using only the blue template appeal from the Newbies/FAQ thread and did not tick any other option that says you were the driver, then they cannot now try and pin this on the RK.

Their PCN is not PoFA compliant. In facvt if you read the miserable attempt at trying to make it appear as though it is, it says (and I paraphrase): "If we don't know the name and address of the driver we have the right to recover blah, blah from the driver". How intellectualy malnourished are these scammers?

Personally, I'd respond with the following but it's up to you whether you bother at all:

Dear Minion,

I refer you to the fact that your PCN is not PoFA complaint and no matter how much you wish it to be so, you cannot invoke PoFA adfter you have issued a non-PoFA compliant PCN. So, in light of this, I invite you to write to the driver because my appeal as the registered keeper is all you are going to get from me.

I sugest you save us all a lot of time and effort by either cancelling the PCN or going straight to court claim without the usual debt collector threats, as we both know that they are powerless and are not a party to any alleged contract you allege has been breached by the driver, not me, the registered keeper. Any involvement of a third party not a party to the alleged contract will be considered vexatious and harrasment.

Umkomaas

Utter male bovine testicles

Is there a female version? 🫣 🐄 

Bbyoda

KeithP said:

Hello and welcome.

Ignore that letter and wait patiently for your appeal to be rejected.
You will then need to file a PoPLA appeal as described in the third post of the NEWBIES thread.

Have you complained the St Georges Centre about this and because you are a valued customer, sought their help in overturning the PCN?

On the face of it, it looks like the driver parked there for about twenty-four minutes without paying. Is that right?

Hello, and thank you for your welcome and help.

I haven’t complained to St George’s Centre yet as wasn’t sure where I stood with that as to not having much of an excuse as such.

Yes you are right the driver parked without actually leaving the car and didn’t pay as they were waiting to pick someone up . It wasn’t actually me as the registered keeper who parked.

Coupon-mad

To help to avoid this in future, it's worth knowing that a driver who is picking someone up should never go into a car park to wait.  There are sharks with cameras in car parks.

This is what double and single yellow lines on-street are actually for.  Honestly.

Is the driver unaware of that rule? A lot of experienced drivers don't know that's what yellow lines are for. I had to educate a group of my girlfriends in this last year and they've all been driving for decades!

Please tell the driver in your case never to seek out a car park for short waits involving picking up or dropping off a passenger.  Make sure they avoid private car parks. Sitting in the car IS parking.

Stop on street on a yellow line.

Bbyoda

Hi, Premier Park have obviously rejected my appeal and sent to POPLA. I emailed St George’s to complain and they said the site is managed by Premier Park and they can not do anything. 

So now proceeding with POPLA, I just want to check this is the correct POPLA appeal I should be going with? Is there anything I need to add?

The operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact the driver who may have been potentially liable for the charge

In cases with a keeper appellant, yet no POFA 'keeper liability' to rely upon, POPLA must first consider whether they are confident that the Assessor knows who the driver is, based on the evidence received. No presumption can be made about liability whatsoever. A vehicle can be driven by any person (with the consent of the owner) as long as the driver is insured. There is no dispute that the driver was entitled to drive the car and I can confirm that they were, but I am exercising my right not to name that person.

In this case, no other party apart from an evidenced driver can be told to pay. As there has been no admission regarding who was driving, and no evidence has been produced, it has been held by POPLA on numerous occasions, that a parking charge cannot be enforced against a keeper without a valid NTK.

As the keeper of the vehicle, it is my right to choose not to name the driver, yet still not be lawfully held liable if an operator is not using or complying with Schedule 4. This applies regardless of when the first appeal was made and regardless of whether a purported 'NTK' was served or not, because the fact remains I am only appealing as the keeper and ONLY Schedule 4 of the POFA (or evidence of who was driving) can cause a keeper appellant to be deemed to be the liable party.

The burden of proof rests with the Operator to show that (as an individual) I have personally not complied with terms in place on the land and show that I am personally liable for their parking charge. They cannot.

Furthermore, the vital matter of full compliance with the POFA was confirmed by parking law expert barrister, Henry Greenslade, the previous POPLA Lead Adjudicator, in 2015:

Understanding keeper liability

'There appears to be continuing misunderstanding about Schedule 4. Provided certain conditions are strictly complied with, it provides for recovery of unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the vehicle.

There is no 'reasonable presumption' in law that the registered keeper of a vehicle is the driver. Operators should never suggest anything of the sort. Further, a failure by the recipient of a notice issued under Schedule 4 to name the driver, does not of itself mean that the recipient has accepted that they were the driver at the material time. Unlike, for example, a Notice of Intended Prosecution where details of the driver of a vehicle must be supplied when requested by the police, pursuant to Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, a keeper sent a Schedule 4 notice has no legal obligation to name the driver. [...] If {POFA 2012 Schedule 4 is} not complied with then keeper liability does not generally pass.'

Therefore, no lawful right exists to pursue unpaid parking charges from myself as keeper of the vehicle, where an operator cannot transfer the liability for the charge using the POFA.

This exact finding was made in 6061796103 against ParkingEye in September 2016, where POPLA Assessor Carly Law found:

''I note the operator advises that it is not attempting to transfer the liability for the charge using the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and so in mind, the operator continues to hold the driver responsible. As such, I must first consider whether I am confident that I know who the driver is, based on the evidence received. After considering the evidence, I am unable to confirm that the appellant is in fact the driver. As such, I must allow the appeal on the basis that the operator has failed to demonstrate that the appellant is the driver and therefore liable for the charge. As I am allowing the appeal on this basis, I do not need to consider the other grounds of appeal raised by the appellant. Accordingly, I must allow this appeal.''

KeithP

Why do you feel able to say "In cases with a keeper appellant, yet no POFA 'keeper liability' to rely upon..." and "In this case, no other party apart from an evidenced driver can be told to pay"?

Why cannot the parking company use the facilities of POFA to transfer any driver's liability to the keeper?

Coupon-mad

To argue that Premier Park are not POFA compliant (and can't hold a keeper liable) would require some forensic dissection of the NTK wording and some specific quoting from previous PP POPLA appeals where Assessors have agreed that the NTK wording doesn't fly.

You will find this in POPLA DECISIONS.

And we never suggest POPLA appeals based on a single point.

Bbyoda

KeithP said:

Why do you feel able to say "In cases with a keeper appellant, yet no POFA 'keeper liability' to rely upon..." and "In this case, no other party apart from an evidenced driver can be told to pay"?

Why cannot the parking company use the facilities of POFA to transfer any driver's liability to the keeper?

I really don’t know what I’m doing. I don’t understand most of it. Other than not being the actual driver and just saying that I don’t know how to back my argument up. I copied that from one of the links after spending days going through trying to make sense of it.

Bbyoda

Coupon-mad said:

To argue that Premier Park are not POFA compliant (and can't hold a keeper liable) would require some forensic dissection of the NTK wording and some specific quoting from previous PP POPLA appeals where Assessors have agreed that the NTK wording doesn't fly.

You will find this in POPLA DECISIONS.

And we never suggest POPLA appeals based on a single point.

I have spent days going through the POPLA threads and sat in tears because I really don’t know what I’m doing. Have I got no argument with not being the driver? Should I just pay? Although this will now be the full £120 😭