UKPC postal notice received for 7mins inside Machine Mart carpark

Beano456

Hi guys, any help appreciated. The RK has received a postal NtK from UKPC for a private carpark infringement at a Machine Mart store. It says, “the vehicle was parked in an area designated for registered users only for 0 hours 7 minutes 5 seconds”. I’ve not used that store for a while but talking to someone who has, it appears they have introduced a keypad system in store for customers to enter reg number.  The RK was not the driver but does have knowledge of the facts.

 

The driver did stop at the store with the full intention to enter Machine Mart to enquire about a product and make a purchase. It was only after entering the carpark that the driver realised that they did not have their wallet on them and would be unable to make a purchase. The driver was somewhat panicked at the thought of losing their wallet and stopped briefly to check if it had fallen out in the footwell / under the seats then realised they had earlier changed clothing and had inadvertently left the wallet in the clothing they previously wore. The driver did not leave the vehicle and remained inside with the engine running for that brief period and drove off once they realised that they had left their wallet at home.

 

Appreciate if anyone can kindly check the paperwork they sent for compliance. The actual time stationary will be much less than the 7mins 5secs stated on the notice as they have calculated that from the moment the moving vehicle enters to leaving, and not the time taken manoeuvring / reversing & finding a suitable place to stop then drive off again inside the carpark.

Car1980

Did they return to the store at a later time?

If they did make a purchase later it would be best complaining to Machine Mart.

Coupon-mad

Other than that, ignore UKPC or try an appeal then a POPLA appeal based on no contract agreed because the car was stationary for less than 5 minutes and the driver left immediately after realising they hadn't brought their wallet. 

Beano456

Just a quick update, appeal by the RK was submitted to ukpc and have received what appears to be their stock reply asking for driver details to assist in making a decision.  Now I know this probably goes against usual protocol here, but tempted to give the driver details on this occasion. Reason being is that the RK wants this paid and has no backbone to fight it, and will cave at the 1st threatogram or the mention of court. Driver on the other hand is a tenacious !!!!!! and will fight this all the way. If they have fully complied with POFA then the driver has no problem with being named to continue the fight in their own name.

patient_dream

Normal rubbish from UKPC asking who the driver was.  Non of their business and a request to IGNORE

Coupon-mad

Beano456 said:

Just a quick update, appeal by the RK was submitted to ukpc and have received what appears to be their stock reply asking for driver details to assist in making a decision.  Now I know this probably goes against usual protocol here, but tempted to give the driver details on this occasion. Reason being is that the RK wants this paid and has no backbone to fight it, and will cave at the 1st threatogram or the mention of court. Driver on the other hand is a tenacious !!!!!! and will fight this all the way. If they have fully complied with POFA then the driver has no problem with being named to continue the fight in their own name.

But why isn't the keeper just doing what I advised? Easy win at POPLA. The driver gained no amenity from the 4 minutes blah blah.

And if that easy stage doesn't work, the keeper THEN transfers liability and leaves the rest up to the driver.

bill93326

UKPC in clear breach of PoFA here...

Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, (paragraph 9.4) states:

"The notice must be given by –

1. Handing it to the keeper, or leaving it at a current address for the service for the keeper, within the relevant period; or
2. Sending it in the post to a current address for the service for the keeper so that it is delivered to that address within the relevant period."

Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, (paragraph 9.5) states:
"A notice sent by post is to be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, to have been delivered (and so “given” for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4)) on the second working day after the day on which it is posted; and for this purpose “working day” means any day other than a Saturday, Sunday or a public holiday in England and Wales."

Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, (paragraph 9.2) states:

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—

(i)the amount of the unpaid parking charges specified under paragraph (d) has not been paid in full, and

(ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver,

the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid;

The date posted and the date issued / given are both the same date which is a clear breach of PoFA. If they posted it on 26-Feb then the issue date should have been 28-Feb. They can't deliver the letter the same day they post it. They are given you 28 days from the day after their given date i.e. by 27-Mar but they should have given you until 31-Mar (29-Mar/30-Mar not counted as weekend)

Also UKPC in breach of the BPA code of practice which says 
Keeper has up to 14 DAYS after delivery of the Notice to Keeper to pay at discounted rate

UKPC are offering you 14 days within date of the parking charge to pay discount. They obviously can't deliver the letter the day they post it so are in breach of the BPA Code here too