NCP auto-pay failure - multiple PCNs - tricky case

Coupon-mad

I think it does matter.  The easy win only comes when the hirer DOESN'T admit to driving in the appeals.

christopher101

Ho @nopcns amd @Coupon-mad, thank you again for your earlier comments. I am finally putting togther my appeal to POPLA for the 5 unpaid PCNs. I would be extremely grateful for any feedback on the below stratey:

As the registered keeper of the vehicle, I wish to appeal a recent parking charge. I submit the points below to show that the driver is not liable for the parking charge:

 Previous use of Auto-pay system

I am already registered for Autopay at this station, as shown by the confirmation email addressed to me below, which states that Autopay is in force AND that I do not have to pay by any other means.

{provide screenshot]

The vehicle was successfully parked using Autopay on previous occasions, X, Y, Z prior to the alleged contravention, thus demonstrating my willingness to normally pay for parking but for the issues  as a result of auto-pay feature being disabled

{provide three most recent dates that auto-pay worked}

I have complied with all requirements for Autopay to be active and no charge would have been issued had the ANPR and Autopay systems been working.

 

Technical failures, as well as signage and communication issues

Pay Later website not recognising my registration number (flagged by email early February)

{provide screenshot evidence of this]

I was not emailed, received no phone calls or text messages or other communication that could have easily alerted me to the auto-pay system not working.

 It is important to stress therefore that I was not specifically looking out for signs in the carpark as I fully expected the auto-pay system to continue working. I only realised the issue after noticing that payments had not been taken. The signage in the car park was not sufficient and can easily be obscured. For example, the lifts in the car park were not working for many months during this time and the automatic door entry system has been smashed. This meant there were often workmen and other distractions blocking the signage.

 Evidence of my attempts to comply and communicate:

Demonstration that I tried to pay immediately as soon as I realised that auto-pay had not been taking payments

{provide screenshot of email for evidence of this}

 After realising the issues, I tried to use the manual payment methods in the car park, but these would not accept my corporate discount code, despite multiple efforts (flagged by email in early February)

{provide screenshot of email for evidence of this]

I then tried to ‘Pay Later’ on the NCP website. But this option was only possible within 48 hours of parking and so it was too late. This restricted time window to pay later was not clear from the signage.

{Photo of sign about auto-pay not working that mentions ability to pay later but does not mention time restrictions for this}

 I had a discussion by email leading to being told to phone up when I tried to resolve payments over email. 

{Screenshot of email}

 II tried to phone but was not able to get through with wait times being extremely long. The one team I managed to get through and speak to NCP by phone I was told they could not process payments beyond 7 days after parking and transferred to another team; I was then cut off

{Screenshot of time duration of phone call to NCP of 45 minutes}

During this time where I was trying to make payments, parking fines were being sent to our lease company rather than our home address, therefore I was not alerted to the charges until several months after it began, despite first emailing NCP to say I was having an issue and I did not know how to pay

{Screenshot of email evidence}

Coupon-mad

No.  That gives away who was driving.

And completely misses the winning point mentioned before. 

nopcns

Talk about shooting yourself in both feet! "...I parked" and "...I drove" etc. These are "golden tickets" as long as you don't reveal the drivers identity.

You are responding as the "keeper". You can talk about how the "driver" did this or that but please stop dobbing yourself in the mire by writing about how you, the "keeper" were also the "driver". Keeper and driver are two separate entities and NCP have failed to rely on PoFA to transfer liability from the driver to the keeper. They have no idea who the keeper is unless you fire both barrels into both feet simultaneously.

christopher101

@Coupon-mad and @nopcns, thanks for responding. But I’m really not sure what is my “winning point” mentioned before? My wife admitted to driving in her appeal to the PCC and this covered all 5 unpaid PCNs. I can rewrite it from the perspective of the keeper and say that they did not meet PoFA requirements on grounds of the dates they were issued not being within 14 days but I’m not sure if this matters since they know the driver identity. I would appreciate feedback on my appeal on the assumption they know who is the driver. Have nevertheless tweaked wording based on your responses as follows:

Appeal to POPLA: Parking Charge Notices

As the registered keeper of the vehicle, I am appealing the recent parking charges on the grounds that the parking operator has failed to adhere to the statutory requirements outlined in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA), which are necessary for legally transferring liability from the driver to the keeper. Below, I detail the specific failures of the operator in meeting these requirements.

Non-Adherence to PoFA Requirements

• Timing of the Notice to Keeper (NtK): The Notice to Keeper was not issued within the required timeframe. According to PoFA 2012, the NtK must be delivered to the keeper within 14 days of the parking event to hold the keeper liable when the driver’s identity is not known. In this case, the NtK was issued on [Insert Date], which is [Insert Number of Days] days after the alleged parking contravention on [Insert Date of Contravention].

Further Grounds for Appeal:

Previous Use of Auto-pay System

• The vehicle was registered for Auto-pay at this parking facility, evidenced by the confirmation email below, which clearly states that Auto-pay was active and no other payment method was necessary.

• [Attach screenshot of confirmation email]

• The vehicle was successfully parked using Auto-pay on multiple occasions prior to the alleged contraventions, demonstrating the driver’s consistent compliance with the expected payment process.

• [Provide dates auto-pay worked successfully]

Technical Failures, Signage, and Communication Issues

• The ‘Pay Later’ feature on the operator’s website did not recognize the vehicle’s registration number, an issue which was promptly reported by the keeper via email in early February.

• [Attach screenshot evidence]

• The driver received no emails, phone calls, text messages, or any communication that could have alerted them to the malfunction of the auto-pay system.

• The signage within the car park was not sufficiently clear or visible and was often obscured by ongoing maintenance, such as non-operational lifts and a damaged automatic door system. This likely prevented the driver from being aware of any issues with the auto-pay system.

• [Photo of car park lift not working and workmen]

Evidence of Efforts to Comply and Communicate

• Upon realization that auto-pay had not been processing payments, the driver attempted to rectify the situation immediately, evidence of which is provided by the keeper’s correspondence with the parking operator.

• [Attach screenshot of email correspondence]

The driver encountered issues with manual payment methods at the car park, which failed to accept the corporate discount code despite several attempts. These efforts were documented by the keeper in emails sent to the parking operator.

• [Attach screenshot of email correspondence]

The driver attempted to use the ‘Pay Later’ option on the operator’s website, but found it was only feasible within a restricted timeframe of 48 hours post-parking, a limitation not clearly stated on the relevant signage.

• [Photo of sign with unclear time restrictions]

Coupon-mad

Oh dear. So the winning point was binned?

christopher101

@coupon-mad and @nopcns, I'm submitting the appeal today. I tried to be clear from the outset that my wife had named herself as the driver in her appeal to the PPC for all PCNs. I would really appreciate any feedback on my POPLA appeal given this. I have started with "Non-Adherence to PoFA Requirements" and have referred to the keeper - avoiding naming the driver, but is this unnecessary? Or perhaps even something I should not do, and should also remove the PoFA aspects and just stick to the other stuff. Thank you!

Coupon-mad

You cannot use anything from PoFA if that winning point was binned at first appeal by the driver hastily appealing before coming here.