CPMUK pofa v nonpofa sites

MrNoPlateNoCase

Hey forumites, ive been a long time lurker and thanks to everyone here Ive learnt a lot and can now defend them myself. Most recently had a court case against PCM and won + won costs happy days

anyways my question is, is there a reason why cpmuk issue pofa compliant invoices on some sites and nonpofa on others. Found it strange since its the same scammers. 

Ive received 2 parking charges both nonpofa and was thinking would it be very suitable at the end of my appeal to put

”Either cancel this charge or start your small claims court process. PUT UP OR SHUT UP”

i saw one of you OGs say to include it on some other posts but thought id ask before i do anything.

Fruitcake

It may be something to do with the PPC's contract with the landowner that does not permit the PPC to issue claims against someone who was not in the vehicle at the time.
It could be any number of other things. Residential v non residential, or ANPR scameras v foot patrols, or self ticketing sites, or knowing NTKs will always take too long to be compliant.

Who knows, but it will be something to do with making life easier for the PPC, or a cost saving.

Debszzzz2

It could be that they have decided not to rely on PoFA as that requires them to follow strict guidelines such as getting the NtK to the keeper within 14 days of the alleged contravention. It could also be because they know they cannot rely on PoFA because the and they operate on is under statutory control. Who knows?

Please show us suitable redacted pictures of the NtKs you received leaving all dates visible.

Coupon-mad

It's not site specific.