EV charging at service station - PCN

TheDefiantOne

Umkomaas said:

Is the above appeal to go to CP Plus or to POPLA?  Is it being sent in your name or your company's name? If your name, has your company formally transferred liability to you?

That appeal will go to POPLA because I've already sent an email to CP Plus that I think they will take as an appeal unfortunately if not then I will edit this to send to CP Plus. The company has not formally transferred liability to me, they've just asked me to deal with it.

TheDefiantOne

B789 said:

Be very careful how you word some of your appeal as you are possibly insinuating that you were the driver:

5) EV Charging not parking in car park

The driver was using the EV charger and not only is this not 'parking' in the car park, but no CP Plus contractual signs are visible at the EV bays.  Proof of charging is attached as evidence, as well as view of the signage from the bays.

I would also invite CP Plus to prove that they had authority from the charging operator (Gridserve) to issue a fine for parking in a bay that was marked as operated by Gridserve for charging purposes.

If your “proof” of “evidence” of charging is a receipt in your name, does that mean that you were the driver?

Also, stop calling it a “fine”.

Oh yes! I will alter what I have put to take out the driver. What should I call it instead of a fine?

Umkomaas

TheDefiantOne said:

Umkomaas said:

Is the above appeal to go to CP Plus or to POPLA?  Is it being sent in your name or your company's name? If your name, has your company formally transferred liability to you?

That appeal will go to POPLA because I've already sent an email to CP Plus that I think they will take as an appeal unfortunately if not then I will edit this to send to CP Plus. The company has not formally transferred liability to me, they've just asked me to deal with it.

This could get quite messy. 

Ideally this should have been the correct route:

1. Arval, on receipt of NtK in their name, respond to CPP and pass liability to your company.
2. Your company, on receipt of NtH in their name, respond to CPP and pass liability to you
3. On receipt of NtH in your name, you appeal to CPP using the appropriate @EdnaBasher appeal from the NEWBIES FAQ Announcement, first post.
4. On receipt of CPP rejection with POPLA verification code, you appeal to POPLA. 

Where you're at now is a bit confusing. Should CPP respond to whatever it is you've written to them, assuming you to be the hirer, then you should receive a POPLA code. With that, you can use the appeal you've drafted above as the basis for it. 

However, if CPP don't respond to you, it might be prudent to get your company to pass on liability to you, then follow the route above. Whatever you do, I wouldn't use the appeal you've drafted above to send to CPP. If you have to appeal to CPP, then it's the EdnaBasher one. 

As I said, this is starting to look messy, but get back to us if/when you (or maybe even your company) get any form of response from CPP. 

B789

TheDefiantOne said:

B789 said:

Be very careful how you word some of your appeal as you are possibly insinuating that you were the driver:

5) EV Charging not parking in car park

The driver was using the EV charger and not only is this not 'parking' in the car park, but no CP Plus contractual signs are visible at the EV bays.  Proof of charging is attached as evidence, as well as view of the signage from the bays.

I would also invite CP Plus to prove that they had authority from the charging operator (Gridserve) to issue a fine for parking in a bay that was marked as operated by Gridserve for charging purposes.

If your “proof” of “evidence” of charging is a receipt in your name, does that mean that you were the driver?

Also, stop calling it a “fine”.

Oh yes! I will alter what I have put to take out the driver. What should I call it instead of a fine?

Count the number of times the word “fine” appears in any documentation and give me £100 for each occurrence.

You Your lessor has received a speculative invoice for an alleged breach of contract from an unregulated scammer private parking company. No one has received any “fine”.

I still don’t understand why you are appealing this. Your name doesn’t appear on any speculative invoice yet. Your lessor may or may not have followed the correct protocol by transferring their liability to you, the lessee. Just sending you a copy of the speculative invoice and telling you to deal with it doesn’t relieve them from their liability.

It appears that you may have informed the unregulated private parking company that you are the lessee (or possibly even inadvertently admitted to being the driver) and they are now reissuing the speculative invoice in your name as the driver or lessee but you have not yet received that invoice.

It would seem that you are rushing into this and are about to blow your guaranteed win against the scam by shooting yourself in the foot by throwing away the PoFA defence.

TheDefiantOne

Umkomaas said:

TheDefiantOne said:

Umkomaas said:

Is the above appeal to go to CP Plus or to POPLA?  Is it being sent in your name or your company's name? If your name, has your company formally transferred liability to you?

That appeal will go to POPLA because I've already sent an email to CP Plus that I think they will take as an appeal unfortunately if not then I will edit this to send to CP Plus. The company has not formally transferred liability to me, they've just asked me to deal with it.

This could get quite messy. 

Ideally this should have been the correct route:

1. Arval, on receipt of NtK in their name, respond to CPP and pass liability to your company.
2. Your company, on receipt of NtH in their name, respond to CPP and pass liability to you
3. On receipt of NtH in your name, you appeal to CPP using the appropriate @EdnaBasher appeal from the NEWBIES FAQ Announcement, first post.
4. On receipt of CPP rejection with POPLA verification code, you appeal to POPLA. 

Where you're at now is a bit confusing. Should CPP respond to whatever it is you've written to them, assuming you to be the hirer, then you should receive a POPLA code. With that, you can use the appeal you've drafted above as the basis for it. 

However, if CPP don't respond to you, it might be prudent to get your company to pass on liability to you, then follow the route above. Whatever you do, I wouldn't use the appeal you've drafted above to send to CPP. If you have to appeal to CPP, then it's the EdnaBasher one. 

As I said, this is starting to look messy, but get back to us if/when you (or maybe even your company) get any form of response from CPP. 

Right okay, I have sent an email this morning to my company to ask for confirmation of this. I will sit and wait on this. I'm just nervous I'm going to end up with a court claim or that my company will rush into something and then I will end up with more of an amount to pay. I will update once I know more

TheDefiantOne

B789 said:

TheDefiantOne said:

B789 said:

Be very careful how you word some of your appeal as you are possibly insinuating that you were the driver:

5) EV Charging not parking in car park

The driver was using the EV charger and not only is this not 'parking' in the car park, but no CP Plus contractual signs are visible at the EV bays.  Proof of charging is attached as evidence, as well as view of the signage from the bays.

I would also invite CP Plus to prove that they had authority from the charging operator (Gridserve) to issue a fine for parking in a bay that was marked as operated by Gridserve for charging purposes.

If your “proof” of “evidence” of charging is a receipt in your name, does that mean that you were the driver?

Also, stop calling it a “fine”.

Oh yes! I will alter what I have put to take out the driver. What should I call it instead of a fine?

Count the number of times the word “fine” appears in any documentation and give me £100 for each occurrence.

You Your lessor has received a speculative invoice for an alleged breach of contract from an unregulated scammer private parking company. No one has received any “fine”.

I still don’t understand why you are appealing this. Your name doesn’t appear on any speculative invoice yet. Your lessor may or may not have followed the correct protocol by transferring their liability to you, the lessee. Just sending you a copy of the speculative invoice and telling you to deal with it doesn’t relieve them from their liability.

It appears that you may have informed the unregulated private parking company that you are the lessee (or possibly even inadvertently admitted to being the driver) and they are now reissuing the speculative invoice in your name as the driver or lessee but you have not yet received that invoice.

It would seem that you are rushing into this and are about to blow your guaranteed win against the scam by shooting yourself in the foot by throwing away the PoFA defence.

B789 said:

TheDefiantOne said:

B789 said:

Be very careful how you word some of your appeal as you are possibly insinuating that you were the driver:

5) EV Charging not parking in car park

The driver was using the EV charger and not only is this not 'parking' in the car park, but no CP Plus contractual signs are visible at the EV bays.  Proof of charging is attached as evidence, as well as view of the signage from the bays.

I would also invite CP Plus to prove that they had authority from the charging operator (Gridserve) to issue a fine for parking in a bay that was marked as operated by Gridserve for charging purposes.

If your “proof” of “evidence” of charging is a receipt in your name, does that mean that you were the driver?

Also, stop calling it a “fine”.

Oh yes! I will alter what I have put to take out the driver. What should I call it instead of a fine?

Count the number of times the word “fine” appears in any documentation and give me £100 for each occurrence.

You Your lessor has received a speculative invoice for an alleged breach of contract from an unregulated scammer private parking company. No one has received any “fine”.

I still don’t understand why you are appealing this. Your name doesn’t appear on any speculative invoice yet. Your lessor may or may not have followed the correct protocol by transferring their liability to you, the lessee. Just sending you a copy of the speculative invoice and telling you to deal with it doesn’t relieve them from their liability.

It appears that you may have informed the unregulated private parking company that you are the lessee (or possibly even inadvertently admitted to being the driver) and they are now reissuing the speculative invoice in your name as the driver or lessee but you have not yet received that invoice.

It would seem that you are rushing into this and are about to blow your guaranteed win against the scam by shooting yourself in the foot by throwing away the PoFA defence.

Thank you for informing more. I will not be sending anything more to the parking company until I know exactly what is going on and what documentation says. I will come back with more details once I have them

Coupon-mad

POPLA Codes last just over 30 days.

TheDefiantOne

Umkomaas said:

TheDefiantOne said:

Umkomaas said:

Is the above appeal to go to CP Plus or to POPLA?  Is it being sent in your name or your company's name? If your name, has your company formally transferred liability to you?

That appeal will go to POPLA because I've already sent an email to CP Plus that I think they will take as an appeal unfortunately if not then I will edit this to send to CP Plus. The company has not formally transferred liability to me, they've just asked me to deal with it.

This could get quite messy. 

Ideally this should have been the correct route:

1. Arval, on receipt of NtK in their name, respond to CPP and pass liability to your company.
2. Your company, on receipt of NtH in their name, respond to CPP and pass liability to you
3. On receipt of NtH in your name, you appeal to CPP using the appropriate @EdnaBasher appeal from the NEWBIES FAQ Announcement, first post.
4. On receipt of CPP rejection with POPLA verification code, you appeal to POPLA. 

Where you're at now is a bit confusing. Should CPP respond to whatever it is you've written to them, assuming you to be the hirer, then you should receive a POPLA code. With that, you can use the appeal you've drafted above as the basis for it. 

However, if CPP don't respond to you, it might be prudent to get your company to pass on liability to you, then follow the route above. Whatever you do, I wouldn't use the appeal you've drafted above to send to CPP. If you have to appeal to CPP, then it's the EdnaBasher one. 

As I said, this is starting to look messy, but get back to us if/when you (or maybe even your company) get any form of response from CPP. 

This is what I got back from my company when I asked who the car is registered under:
'Arval are the registered keeper.

 

I thought you had an appeal rejected?  You can appeal and let them know you were the driver at the same time, I’ve done that myself.  All info is on the reverse of the fine, transferring liability.'

Obviously I don't think I want to fill in the reverse as that is admitting to being the driver. I also don't want them to deal with the appeal as I don't think they would do it right or would even make the effort to as they're pressuring me to pay it. So can I respond by stating I am appealing 'on behalf of the lessee' which would be my company? And that way I am not admitting to being the driver?

Coupon-mad

Yes do that.

TheDefiantOne

Coupon-mad said:

Yes do that.

Thank you so much for your help I really appreciate it! I'm really glad I found this forum.