Park & Control PCN issued on Hire car - long time from initial breach until letter showed up

firsttimecallerlongtimelurker

Hi guys, just after a bit of advice please if anyone can help.

original breach: 01/02/2025
rental company contacts me via email: 20/03/2025
i receive a letter from park and control: 26/05/2025

The first i heard of the breach was the email from the hire company telling me there would be a fine from them due to having to deal with the admin and they would be letting park and control know i was the hirer at the time. No yellow ticket on car.

I hear nothing for a very long time. Then the letter shows up a few days ago with a 'date of issue of this notice' stating 19/05/2025.

1. Is the time gap between breach date and the date the hire company contacted me excessive?
2. Is the time between the date the hire company emailed me and presumably contacted park and control excessive? (it is a big rental company so you would think this was automated almost straight away.).
3. Is the time gap between when park and control would have got my details to when they sent the letter out to
 me excessive?

To me, it would appear all 3 are excessive and from what i have read out of the legal time frame.

Is anybody able to assist me with next steps and weather i have a winnable appeal.

park and control are IAS and IPC, which i read on some of the posts here, side with the parking company.

thank you in advance for any help you can provide.

Gr1pr

The parking company has 6 months to obtain keeper details and one month to get the pcn to the keeper 

The hire company keeper can then transfer liability to the hirer by giving them the hirer details and should also provide a copy of the hire agreement as well,  the parking company then issue a new NtH pcn to the hirer,  by post 

Pofa2012 details the timescales and requirements to hold a hirer liable,  should they wish to do so, so check the hirer section in Pofa2012 for that timescale 

The deadline for a court claim starting is 6 years in England and Wales 

Generally it's a waste of time taking it to the IAS,  but do appeal the postal NtH pcn if Park and Control posted it to you  ( not the NTK PCN to the hire company   )

Park and Control might not be invoking Pofa2012,  in which case the timescale aspect isn't relevant,  not until 6 years have passed,  but they will definitely reject your NtH pcn appeal 

firsttimecallerlongtimelurker

Thanks for your reply @Gr1pr

I have just been looking at Pofa2012 and what i believe to be the relevant sections you recommended.

Unfortunately i don't quite understand what i am reading and weather i have an appeal or not.

From my understanding, the date the rental company contacted me (20/03/2025) and the date headed on the letter i received this week (19/05/2025) are well over 14 or 28 days (the only numbers i could see on Pofa2012).

Am i wasting my time looking to appeal? should i just pay and move on?

Gr1pr

The 14 days applies to the NTK PCN letter to the hire company,  not to the hirer, check the appropriate hire section in Pofa2012 for the additional timescale 

On a sidenote, parking companies never include the hire agreement copy with an NtH, thereby not complying with pofa,  Pofa2012 requires much more than mere timescales,  parking companies must adhere to every requirement in order to transfer liability,  but usually fail,  so never bin Pofa2012 arguments,  just use the correct section and arguments,  especially timescales,  wording and lack of an enclosed hire agreement 

Coupon-mad

I receive a letter from park and control: 26/05/2025

Please show both sides of that Notice, if they are not in my NTK Pictures thread (they don't ring a bell so I need this one!).

firsttimecallerlongtimelurker

@Coupon-mad i can upload images now so i will do this tomorrow morning for you.

They haven't left me long to decide what i am going to do so i am likely going to pay it over the weekend and move on (would rather not but not sure if i have a case or not). I really think the times aren't right and they are over what is deemed as acceptable.

If you are able to give me a straight yes or no as to weather i will win or not if i appeal i would very much appreciate your assistance.

Coupon-mad

firsttimecallerlongtimelurker said:

@Coupon-mad i can upload images now so i will do this tomorrow morning for you.

They haven't left me long to decide what i am going to do so i am likely going to pay it over the weekend and move on (would rather not but not sure if i have a case or not). I really think the times aren't right and they are over what is deemed as acceptable.

If you are able to give me a straight yes or no as to weather i will win or not if i appeal i would very much appreciate your assistance.

Win at appeal? LOL, heck no. 

You'll likely 'lose' because this is an IPC firm and there is no appeal.

But you are not going to pay it to make it go away. People who do that fund the scam against the next (more vulnerable) victim. Don't be that person please.

firsttimecallerlongtimelurker

@Coupon-mad

ok ok i get the picture!   

what would you suggest? Do i just ignore? what happens then?

in response to @Gr1pr the letter im adding here is all that park and control sent me.

both sides attached as promised

Gr1pr

Too many redactions,  ideally you should have left the dates showing,  so that timescales can be checked,  plus you should have stated if the copy of the hire agreement was included with the NtH or not,  both being Pofa2012 requirements for transferring liability to the hirer   ( as well as other wording requirements too  )

Overredaction loses the information being sought,  dates,  wordings, warnings and any inclusions 

The only redactions required are QR codes,  name and address , VRM details,  passwords etc, not the rest

It would be good to see a suitably redacted picture of both sides of the NTK PCN letter too 

Presumably that pcn is addressed to you the hirer   ?  ( so isn't the NTK PCN letter sent to the hire company   ?  )

I doubt that a copy of the hire agreement was included with the NtH  ?

troublemaker22

Definitely appeal to the parking company and, when you get the inevitable rejection (contrary to our usual advice) to IAS.  Even a biased and/or incompetent IAS assessor should get this one right, and if they don't, it will be good evidence for the current campaign to replace IAS and POPLA with a fit for purpose appeals service.  Regardless of the appeal outcome you have a rock solid defence if it ever goes to court, provided you refuse to reveal who was driving.  Try the following for your initial appeal and come back for more advice when it's rejected:-

I require you to cancel this parking charge because your notice breaches an important provision of the Private Parking Sector Single Code of Practice (Version 1.1 February 2025) (the 'Code').  Your notice states that all appeals must be received by you within 21 days of the date of the notice.  This is a serious breach of paragraph 8.4.1.a) of the Code which obliges you to provide a process which allows that the parking charge may be appealed within 28 days.

Furthermore, you cannot hold me liable as hirer because your notice does not satisfy all the conditions for hirer liability in Schedule 4 to the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ('POFA') and it is now too late for you to deliver a POFA-compliant notice.  Specifically, your notice was not accompanied by the documents specified in POFA paragraphs 13(2) and 14(2) and does not contain the mandatory warning required by POFA paragraph 14(5)(c). 

Coupon-mad

Do the above.

Then the same at the kangaroo court of IAS.