NPM Northampton - PCN for staying in car for 4 minutes

Grizebeck

You will lose any way so why worry

Coupon-mad

Yes it is a kangaroo court and you won't be paying, even if and when you lose.

For a laugh do respond and say the car was not unoccupied.  Further. the odd lecture from an ex-wheelclamper firm about 'road traffic law' and the PoFA 2012 is just unnecessary drivel from an industry that knows its days of shoo-in IAS 'decisions' are numbered.

State you will use your joke of a PCN and this so-called appeal process and lettters as evidence for the DLUHC's current Call for Evidence that you hope the operator and the IAS are thoroughly enjoying as they try to engineer their last hoorah. Dear Bryn, do your worst. It's all going to the DLUHC.

loftytop15

Dismissal from IAS. Do i simply wait for the court letters next? They said my time for waiting had passed, even though they do not declare how long this time is. and make it sound like i could park my car for a second and that would be "parked" - such a joke of lies and rules to suit them.

"The Appellant should understand that the Adjudicator is not in a position to give legal advice to either of the parties, but they are entitled to seek their own independent legal advice. The Adjudicator's role is to consider whether or not the parking charge has a basis in law and was properly issued in the circumstances of each individual case. In all Appeals the Adjudicator is bound by the relevant law applicable at the time and is only able to consider legal challenges and not factual mistakes nor extenuating or mitigating circumstances. Throughout this appeal the Operator has had the opportunity consider all points raised and could have conceded the appeal at any stage. The Adjudicator who deals with this Appeal is legally qualified and each case is dealt with according to their understanding of the law as it applies, and the legal principles involved. A decision by an Adjudicator is not legally binding on an Appellant who is entitled to seek their own legal advice if they so wish.

In all Appeals the burden of proof is the civil one whereby the party asserting a fact or submission has to establish that matter on the balance of probabilities. If the parking operator fails to establish that a Parking Charge Notice was properly issued in accordance with the law, then it is likely that an Appeal will be allowed. If the parking operator does establish that a Parking Charge Notice was properly and legally issued, then the burden shifts to the Appellant to establish that the notice was improperly or unlawfully issued and if the Appellant proves those matters on the balance of probabilities, then it is likely that the Appeal will be allowed. However, the Appeal will be dismissed if the Appellant fails to establish those matters on the balance of probabilities. The responsibility is at all times on the parties to provide the Adjudicator with the evidential basis upon which to make a decision.

The Operator has provided evidence of the signs at the site, which make it clear any driver parking without authority, will be issued with the parking charge notice.

The Appellant claims that they were not parked and left within the ten minute grace period. On the former point the grace period is a period of ten minutes at the end of a permitted period of parking, which is longer than one hour in duration. Consequently, it does not apply at the start of the parking event.

The driver is entitled to a reasonable time to read the terms and comply with the requirements. However, the time allowed is for this purpose only and the driver must read the terms and attempt to comply immediately.

The Appellant claims they were not parked as the engine remained on and they did not leave the vehicle. Some definitions of ‘parking' refer to leaving the vehicle. Leave in this sense does not mean to walk away from the vehicle. It means to allow or cause to remain, as in ‘leave your food.' I do not agree with the Appellant's definition of parking. By their use they could remain there all day with the engine on and not be parked.

Clearly parking is a question of fact not degree. One cannot become parked after the passage of an indeterminate period of time. The code of practice defines parking as “a single period of a vehicle being stationary otherwise than in the normal course of driving.” This incorporates the position of the Appellant's vehicle.

The Appellant has my sympathy, but the guidance to the appeal is clear that I may only consider legal issues not extenuating circumstances. The Operator has this discretion, but they are unlikely to exercise it in the Appellant's favour, in the absence of evidence to support the claim.

The Operator has provided photographic evidence of the Appellant's vehicle parked on and without prior authority. The appeal is dismissed."

B789

Get over it. The IAS response is not worth the paper it is written on. It has no bearing whatsoever on anything should this ever progress to a court claim.

If you've read the Newbies/FAQ thread, you already knew that appealing to the IAS was an exercise in futility. Get on with your life and ignore any debt collector letters. If/when you get an LoC, read the second post in the Newbies/FAQ thread for your next steps.

loftytop15

Just to update - got the claim form on 2nd July to my address with an issue date of 14 Jun. I submitted the defence appeal (AOS) on the MCOL website on July 9th

KeithP

loftytop15 said:

Just to update - got the claim form on 2nd July to my address with an issue date of 14 Jun. I submitted the defence appeal (AOS) on the MCOL website on July 9th

Hmmm... I'm uncomfortable with those dates.

If you have a Claim Form with an Issue Date of 14th June, then you either had to file an Acknowledgment of Service or a Defence by 4pm on Wednesday 3rd July.

It appears you did neither.

No idea what your second sentence is trying to tell us. 

I would strongly suggest that you urgently login to MCOL and copy and paste the Claim History into your next post on this thread.

loftytop15

Claims history:

A claim was issued against you on 14/06/2024

Your acknowledgment of service was submitted on 09/07/2024 at 16:36:34

Your acknowledgment of service was received on 10/07/2024 at 08:05:18

loftytop15

I have royal mail forwarding to my current living address potentially causing a delay in the date but it was very large. The claim form definitely arrived 2nd July.

2nd sentence was trying to say that i submitted the AoS on the 9th July which can be seen in the dates from the claim history

loftytop15

I submitted my defence anyway using the template to ClaimResponses.CNBC@justice.gov.uk.
So fingers crossed it goes through - wanted to send it anyway even if any date has passed
(and i read from other threads its worth it if the claimant hasnt filed for a default)

Would obviously appreciate advice on what happens next if i have missed the defence deadline - do they give exceptions for moving address or postage forwarding adding delays?

KeithP

You need to write to both the court and the claimant (or their solicitor if they're using one) informing them both of you current address and instructing them to delete any old address they might have for you.

To rely on mail redirection in your situation is just silly - too easy to miss deadlines or not receive anything at all.

Remember to update you driving licence and you vehicle's registration document with your new address too.