MET NTK Parking Charge Notice BP Stansted non PoFA notice which contains the PoFA warning

russiangoldfinch

I am new here and have been reading the various threads, discussions and guidance, thank you. I have joined and started this thread because I have a question about appealing a notice issued on 27th December within the 14 day period after a parking event on 22nd December which does not refer to PoFA at all but it does contain the text of the PoFA 28 day warning which purports to transfer liability form the driver (not me, not identified) to the registered keeper (me). very poor photographs just apparently showing entry and exit in the dark, driver did not see any signs, was dark on arrival at 17.49, present for 84 minutes waiting for a delayed flight not knowing that MET seek to enforce a 30 minute limit. Driver had parked there in the past with no such penalty but I see from the forum that this is a known issue. Can I appeal on the basis of the airport byelaws ? There seem to be some very mixed responses from POPLA and I wonder whether the insertion of the waring on keeper liability has any effect at all or is simply incorrect and misleading and how I should best approach this ? I will very much welcome advice and thoughts on the current position with aiport byelaw appeals, ie whether POPLA and MET do accept when challenged that they cannot pursue the keeper. Thank you and Happy New Year.

Coupon-mad

Have you compared your NTK to the pictures in my NTK pictures thread? POFA or not?

You don't have a deadline to 'appeal with 14 days'. The NEWBIES thread tells you this in the FAQS. I may have misunderstood your meaning and you were in fact just saying that the NTK was issued 'within 14 days'. 

russiangoldfinch

Thank you very much Coupon-Mad for your rapid response. Yes what I was saying is that this NTK was served within 14 days of the parking event. I have compared my NTK with the others I have seen up to now and what I have noticed is that they mostly either clearly and expressly refer to the PoFA or they do not and they then do NOT contain the 28 day warning. There was one thread where someone came on and asked about the inclusion of this warning in an airport byelaws case but there was not then a full discussion about this - the person who posted was advised to start a fresh thread but I could not find one. So in my case are MET trying to rely on the PoFA by including the warning and /or do they somehow succeed in befuddling the Keeper and POPLA by making it look as though they are complying with PoFA even though this arguably is NOT a PoFA case because of the fact that is at BP Connect Stansted and in fact they do not refer to PoFA at all in their notice ?! This does seem to be confusing and misleading and I would very much welcome advice on how best to approach this in my representations to them and to POPLA. They also make no reference at all to any contract with the landowner or the airport but perhaps this is not unusual.

russiangoldfinch

I will be happy to post my redacted NTK if and when I am allowed to do so - not sure if I am able to do this as yet.

KeithP

russiangoldfinch said:

I will be happy to post my redacted NTK if and when I am allowed to do so - not sure if I am able to do this as yet.

There is nothing stopping you posting pictures.

1505grandad

" I have compared my NTK with the others I have seen up to now ...."

Does that include the thread as per C-m's post today?:-

"Have you compared your NTK to the pictures in my NTK pictures thread?"
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6483542/a-thread-of-pictures-of-parking-firm-ntks/p1

LDast

It matters not whether they issued a PoFA or non PoFA PCN at this location. That car park is not “relevant land” and therefore PoFA does not apply and only the driver can be liable. If the driver is not identified, MET cannot try to recover the charge from the Keeper, no matter what wording they include in the NtK. 

russiangoldfinch

Yes I have looked at the NTK thread, thank you all, and looking again just now I see that my NTK is exactly the same as the POFA MET Parking NTK even though mine is from BP Stansted SF Connect, which I understand definitely comes under the airport byelaws ? ! I was confused as I thought that a POFA NTK would have to mention the POFA but I realise now that is not the case. Mine does not mention the POFA but it does contain the 28 day warning. Am I correct in thinking then that my response should focus on the airport byelaws applying in this location and that this being the case they do not have the right to pursue me and the POFA warning is not applicable here, there can be no liability for me in this case, as per LDast's comment ? It looks like my case is firmly within this category.

ChirpyChicken

just use a relevant airport land appeal. simple

russiangoldfinch

Hello again, I have been researching further and I am not sure that it is that simple ! within the Stansted byelaws it says that they only apply on roads to which the road traffic enactments do not apply and it seems that those enactments may apply on the roads within the airport which are accessible by the public. In this case is it possible that the correct legal position is that the airport byelaws do not in fact apply in the BP Connect car park ? It would be lovely if this is a watertight argumemnt but I am not sure that it is - do you know whether this point has been addressed up to now ? Thank you !

russiangoldfinch

sorry, to clarify my above point, the road traffic enactments may or may not apply to roads within the airport - the byelaws cover both possibilities -- and therefore the question is whether those byelaws take precedence within an area to which the public has access such as the petrol station ?