A thread of Pictures of parking firm NTKs

SumySani

Hi
Please find attached the VCS NTK as requested.

Coupon-mad

Thankyou @SumySani

VCS 'non-POFA' NTK
...non-POFA partly because this is an Airport site (not relevant land) and partly due to this paragraph which says wrongly (unlawfully, according to VCS v Edward) that a keeper can somehow be 'assumed to be the driver' (errr...no):

Another example here, same (non-POFA):

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6488487/charge-notice-from-john-lennon-airport-for-no-stopping-follow-up-advice

UncleThomasCobley

Just a point about PoFA compliance. Some of the allegedly PoFA compliant NtKs shown, use the words "You are advised..." instead of "You are warned..." when referring to the 28 days after which the RK will become liable.

PoFA 2012 9(2)(f) specifically states "The notice must warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given..."

The following argument could be used to hammer the point home:

In arguing the case that a Notice to Keeper (NtK) from an unregulated private parking company is invalid due to the use of "advised" instead of "warned" in relation to liability, consider the following points:

1. **Specific Language of PoFA 2012*

   - The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA 2012) sets out specific requirements for NtKs, particularly in relation to the liability of the registered keeper (RK). It explicitly uses the term "warn" when describing the notification to the keeper about their potential liability.

2. **Legal Precision*

   - Legal documents and statutes are often drafted with precision. If the legislation specifies the use of the term "warn", it implies a deliberate choice of language, and deviation from this language may be argued as a failure to meet the legal requirements.

3. **Intent and Clarity:**

   - The use of the term "warn" implies a certain level of seriousness and urgency. It suggests that the registered keeper needs to be clearly made aware of the consequences and potential liability. If the NtK uses the term "advised" instead, it may be argued that it does not meet the required level of clarity and seriousness as intended by the legislation.

4. **Purpose of Warning*

   - PoFA 2012 includes the requirement for a warning to ensure that the registered keeper is informed about their potential liability and the importance of addressing the matter promptly. If the NtK uses a softer term like "advised", it may be contended that the purpose of the warning, which is to convey a sense of urgency and potential consequences, is not adequately fulfilled.

5. **Legislative Compliance:**

   - Compliance with legislative requirements is crucial for the validity of any legal document, including NtKs. If the language used in the NtK deviates from what is prescribed by the legislation, it may be argued that the document fails to meet the statutory requirements and, therefore, is not legally effective.

bex_84

Parking Eye NTK

Hi, I have read through the Newbie post so will start my own thread but I'm also posting this here incase it's of interest/help

Coupon-mad

Civil Enforcement Ltd

POFA version here

************************************************

Non-POFA version below:

Same in 2024, another non-POFA one:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/80670925/#Comment_80670925

Coupon-mad

PREMIER PARKING SOLUTIONS LTD

IPC AOS, not to be confused with other firms using that acronym 'PPS') a non-POFA NTK:

Coupon-mad

Globe Protection Ltd (IPC firm)

ZZPS do the back office work in this case.

POFA compliant NTK in 2023:

But in late 2024, ZZPS have added some words that lie about the sum that can be recovered from the registered keeper:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81092626/#Comment_81092626

Suddenly, ZZPS are pretending that keeper liability extends to include their DRA fee ... but that isn't true.

That lie means the NTK is misleading about liability and therefore the NTK is non-POFA compliant and arguably breaches the 'misleading conduct' section of the CPUTRS.  Which is an offence.

Coupon-mad

APCOA parking charge (non-railway case)

always non-POFA 2023 - easy appeal win:

Coupon-mad

Euro Car Parks Ltd - BPA

Subtle difference in the new words on the back.
Nov 2023.

They now have a POFA compliant NTK:

Coupon-mad

Minster Baywatch Ltd (BPA AOS)

This version is 'POFA compliant' in wording, so they can hold the keeper liable: