Appeal Devere parking services

MO369

Hi there

Would you be in help with two parking charge notices from Devere parking services for parking in private parking space and let me know whether worth it appealing or just pay them. 

Just to confirm, the driver is a regular visitor to the building centre. 
The parking charge notices both were issued for the reason:
(did not park in the allocated bay to the business resident in/visiting). 

The default in the charge notices both: 

1-  Have location: Pine court business park, Bournemouth, the correct address: Pine court business Centre, 36 Gervis road, BH1 3DH. not park. 

2- The delivered for the notices by post to the car keeper, one of the notice was delivered 22 days after of the incident.

3- The new policy put on place just recently 1st August, and the building management sent a one month notice to the offices occupiers. This change in the policy notice was sent to a personal email and the office occupier missed it, so there is no awareness of the policy change.

4- The parking bay doesn't have a clear visible number or letter, to distinguish whether the bay for visitor or allocated to a business office. 

5- There is not clear signage close to the parking bay where the car was parked, so as a regular visitor didn't notice any change in the parking place. 

6- The photo attached with the charge notice show that the car was parked less than an hour, and based on the term and condition, the maximum stay 2 hours for visitor. . 

B789

Whilst the NtK may have been delivered after 22 days, what is more important is the date it was "deemed" to have been delivered which is 2 working/business days after the date on the NtK. Can you show us a picture of the NtK. You just need to redact your name, address, VRN and PCN number. Everything else is OK and we can then ascertain whether the NtK is PoFA compliant.

Fruitcake

Plan A is always a complaint from the keeper to the landowner and their MP.

Plan B, if no cancellation is forthcoming, is an appeal using the template in blue text from the sticky Announcement for NEWBIES, sent from the keeper.
If the NTK was non-PoFA compliant (missing mandatory wording, or too late for keeper to be held liable) then add a one liner to say so, otherwise send it unaltered.

MO369

Fruitcake the Devere is registered in IPC and the appeal goes to IAS

Fruitcake

The first NTK is not PoFA compliant because it is deemed to have arrived on day 15 (the 22nd of August) and therefore arrived too late to hold the keeper liable. 

I don't think the wording of either NTK is PoFA compliant, but I'll let more knowledgeable posters comment on that.

If Plan A fails, the initial appeal goes to Devere. There is no point appealing to the IAS after that.

B789

The original NtK was issued within the timescale to allow PoFA to be invoked, even though the wording is not completely compliant and they don't refer to which Schedule and which paragraph of the Act they refer.

So, as they are likely to be relying on PoFA and the NtK loosely applies, there's not much reason not to identify as the driver. All the other arguments are as advised in the Newbies/FAQ thread, including poor, misleading or lack of prominence signs, lack of landowner authority etc. etc. apply.

Of course, as advised Plan A should be tried first. Plan B next but Plan C is about as useful as a poke in the arm with a sharp stick.

MO369

B789 Plan A, is already done and refused from the building management. 
So I have to go through the plan B and C. I have already prepared an appeal letters, Can I share them here to check please? thanks!

Coupon-mad

"Appeal Devere parking services"

There is no such thing.  Did you read other IPC threads?  You won't win on appeal.

I would just dispute it once (no IAS. It is a farce) then ignore them.  We haven't heard of a daft Devere court claim in years.  They aren't very good at court except in Poole where it was rumoured they had mates in high places at the court.

DO NOT PAY THEM.

MO369

Coupon-mad I haven't checked the IPC thread yet, I'll do now. But the appeals have to go to IAS as far as the appeal concern, don't they? I am a new driver and I have no experience in those challenges I spent the last couple of days studying the law and how to appeal unfair parking charge notice. 

Coupon-mad

No they don't have to go to IAS because you won't be doing that! My advice stands.

Fruitcake

B789 said:

The original NtK was issued within the timescale to allow PoFA to be invoked, even though the wording is not completely compliant and they don't refer to which Schedule and which paragraph of the Act they refer.

So, as they are likely to be relying on PoFA and the NtK loosely applies, there's not much reason not to identify as the driver. All the other arguments are as advised in the Newbies/FAQ thread, including poor, misleading or lack of prominence signs, lack of landowner authority etc. etc. apply.

Of course, as advised Plan A should be tried first. Plan B next but Plan C is about as useful as a poke in the arm with a sharp stick.

I disagree.

There are 2 NTKs. The first one was for an alleged event on the 7th, = day zero. The NTK was issued on Friday the 18th, which was day 11. The second working day after the date of issue was Tuesday the 22nd, which was day 15, and therefore too late for keeper liability to apply.

I would appeal the first one using the template and add that since the NTK was given too late for the keeper too be held liable, they should cancel now and save themselves money.