Not a hospital car park

1505grandad

Particularly when does the 28 days start in their notice  -  after their tea or pub lunch or when?

Gr1pr

POFA does not state anything about intent, or incorrect wording, the strict wording is there for that reason, to exclude omissions, ambiguity etc

Anything that does not comply with the strict rules regarding wording and timescales, fails 

Coupon-mad

1505grandad said:

Particularly when does the 28 days start in their notice  -  after their tea or pub lunch or when?

Yep - 'if after 28 days' is not compliant.

LDast

28 days after the Rapture? 28 days after a week next Wednesday? 28 days after StarDate 2854432?

To assist the OP in understanding why they have failed to fully comply with the strict requirements of PoFA 9(2)(f), I will spell it out here:

9. A notice which is to be relied on as a notice to keeper for the purposes of paragraph 6(1)(b) is given in accordance with this paragraph if the following requirements are met.

  (2). The notice must—

  (f). warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given...

So, The notice (the original NtK) must warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given...

On what date was the notice given? We know the contravention date but we have no idea when the notice of the contravention was given. Ergo, it does not fully comply with the strict requirements of PoFA.

Therefore, as long as the keeper does not identify the driver, they will have no idea who it was. They are not allowed to assume or infer it was the keeper. Any burden of proof of who the driver was falls on the operator unless the keeper tells them. How do you think they'd know?

kensiko

I noticed I was tagged in this thread so just had a read of it.

Only a very minor point, but on the 1st post on the thread of NTKs https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6483542/a-thread-of-pictures-of-parking-firm-ntks/p1 it says the one I posted for Car Park Securities Ltd is POFA worded.

The one I posted though is the same as the one in this thread so I believe is non POFA?
Might just need changing on that first post.

pustit

Coupon-mad said:

Done!      

What are you referring to, CM ?

Gr1pr

fineclaret said:

Coupon-mad said:

But it's not about the date.

See the reply by Castle.

How does the paragraph under 'important notice to registered keeper' fail to meet the specification in 9 2 f?

Please read the following thread where you can see the correct warning paragraph regarding POFA 

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6529835/payment-not-taken-by-machine#latest

fineclaret

"Pre-Action Protocol Letter before Court Action" received. Just another demand for payment, not sure if there is any action to take beyond wait for the court papers?

One problem: I am away the whole of July. So if anything arrives then, I won't see it in time. Of course I could make them aware of this, but then I'm telling them the best time to serve me - the day I go!

Date of posting again looks iffy, though not as bad as the first time. I received it on Jun 5th. Bank Holiday weekend, of course.

Umkomaas

Debt collection letter - ignore.

If you receive a Letter Of/Before Claim from the PPC's solicitors, or a County Court Claim via the Northampton CNBC, come back to this thread for further advice. 

LDast

Have a read of section 3 of this document:

https://www.justice.gov.uk/documents/debt-pap.pdf

If the letter does not comply with the requirements of section 3 the above document, it is not a Letter of/before Claim. Consider it a debt collector letter and we really don't need to know about it.