guidance

moneyrats

Hi there - hypothetical question of course, and I have read through all the newbie guidance but maybe I missed it. 

I saw the guidance for a driver who received a IPC member parking charge notice letter in the post that doesn't mention a windscreen pcn, and separate guidance for a windscreen pcn, but not guidance where the pcn letter does mention a windscreen pcn but where no actual windscreen pcn was issued. ie basically a lie. So imagine no windscreen pcn issued, but then a letter out of the blue weeks later stating the fictitious windscreen pcn was ignored so now you have to pay x amount more cos you ignored it.

Maybe the context isn't important, but also, if the infraction in the letter was not backed up by the very photos sent to back up the charge....like parking in a disabled spot but the photo shows the car is not, or parking on a zebra crossing where the photo clearly shows it's not. What would the guidance be? Thanks

Car1980

Yes, some unscrupulous companies won't send a notice in the post or put anything on the windscreen because they can just send a £170 invoice later on.

Why invoice £60 when you can just send out £170 letters?

moneyrats

Oh I know....so arbitrary too, if that happened to you, must be hard to take it seriously. Kind of like if some joker just walked up to you and said it was illegal to wear shorts, but don't worry here's how you appeal.

Coupon-mad

moneyrats said:

Hi there - hypothetical question of course, and I have read through all the newbie guidance but maybe I missed it. 

I saw the guidance for a driver who received a IPC member parking charge notice letter in the post that doesn't mention a windscreen pcn, and separate guidance for a windscreen pcn, but not guidance where the pcn letter does mention a windscreen pcn but where no actual windscreen pcn was issued. ie basically a lie. So imagine no windscreen pcn issued, but then a letter out of the blue weeks later stating the fictitious windscreen pcn was ignored so now you have to pay x amount more cos you ignored it.

Maybe the context isn't important, but also, if the infraction in the letter was not backed up by the very photos sent to back up the charge....like parking in a disabled spot but the photo shows the car is not, or parking on a zebra crossing where the photo clearly shows it's not. What would the guidance be? Thanks

If what you have received is a NTK then appeal it as keeper, stating the above observations.

If it's a £170 debt demand, ignore it.

moneyrats

Coupon-mad said:

moneyrats said:

Hi there - hypothetical question of course, and I have read through all the newbie guidance but maybe I missed it. 

I saw the guidance for a driver who received a IPC member parking charge notice letter in the post that doesn't mention a windscreen pcn, and separate guidance for a windscreen pcn, but not guidance where the pcn letter does mention a windscreen pcn but where no actual windscreen pcn was issued. ie basically a lie. So imagine no windscreen pcn issued, but then a letter out of the blue weeks later stating the fictitious windscreen pcn was ignored so now you have to pay x amount more cos you ignored it.

Maybe the context isn't important, but also, if the infraction in the letter was not backed up by the very photos sent to back up the charge....like parking in a disabled spot but the photo shows the car is not, or parking on a zebra crossing where the photo clearly shows it's not. What would the guidance be? Thanks

If what you have received is a NTK then appeal it as keeper, stating the above observations.

If it's a £170 debt demand, ignore it.

In this hypothetical situation, no the letter would not be a NTK it would just be a PCN and it would say that along the top, along with a demand for x amount and threats to increase the amount if the windscreen ticket - that was never issued - and this letter, are ignored even more.

Imagine also, if the land owner were a hospital, and you had already appealed to PALS but so far got no response. Imagine if the grounds for appeal were that the photos prove that the infraction is made up, let alone not even a ticket issued. I wonder what the guidance here would be.

Can't imagine what kind of brain would think it a good idea to hire these dregs of humanity to govern parking in a hospital, where by definition most people are already having an awful time, they aren't there shopping.

Coupon-mad

no the letter would not be a NTK it would just be a PCN

Exact same thing! You are describing a NTK issued (possibly) under paragraph 8 of POFA but with no windscreen PCN found first.

Any hypothetical photos online of the ghost NTD on the windscreen?

moneyrats

Ah, didn't realise that was same thing. No hypothetical photos online no, nothing was ever on windscreen in this situation, only thing that would exist is this parking charge notice posted letter. What would be even stranger would be if the 2 photos printed in the letter not only showed the car not doing what the charge says it is doing, but also if the photo was from so far away that you could not read the number plate of the car either. 

The easy way around proving that you issued a parking ticket to a car's windscreen would be to take a photo of it on the windscreen wouldn't it? Seems like an easy hurdle to overcome, unless you were a total scumbag of course deliberately just issuing letters for larger fines to people in hospital like the poster before said.

It makes me wonder if, after contacting PALS, the person in this situation should just ignore this or actually entertain their appeals process....like as if they were a real company with procedures and outcomes rather than just a bunch of loan sharks and ex bouncers sat around playing video games until someone pays up.

Car1980

There is an NHS process where if you get fobbed off by PALS, then make an official Stage 1>Stage 2 complaint.

With official NHS complaints you are lumped in with people who have medical negligence complaints. Less major issues such as cancelling parking tickets are an easy one for their statistics. You become a "the issue was rectified to the patient's satisfaction" statistic, which is an easy win for them compared with medical complaints.

moneyrats

Car1980 said:

There is an NHS process where if you get fobbed off by PALS, then make an official Stage 1>Stage 2 complaint.

With official NHS complaints you are lumped in with people who have medical negligence complaints. Less major issues such as cancelling parking tickets are an easy one for their statistics. You become a "the issue was rectified to the patient's satisfaction" statistic, which is an easy win for them compared with medical complaints.

Yeah I agree, and actually last year I - me as a person now - did have a legitimate medical PALS complaint so saw how the procedure is.

In this fictitious fine situation though, with PALS just not responding, I wonder if the person should treat these cowboy mother lovers like a real company and follow their appeals, expecting a real outcome, or not bother cos it's all just a joke anyway.

Castle

Car1980 said:

Yes, some unscrupulous companies won't send a notice in the post or put anything on the windscreen because they can just send a £170 invoice later on.

Why invoice £60 when you can just send out £170 letters?

And outside any appeal period, which is then followed by up to 6 years of letters to look forward to.

Car1980

moneyrats said:

Car1980 said:

There is an NHS process where if you get fobbed off by PALS, then make an official Stage 1>Stage 2 complaint.

With official NHS complaints you are lumped in with people who have medical negligence complaints. Less major issues such as cancelling parking tickets are an easy one for their statistics. You become a "the issue was rectified to the patient's satisfaction" statistic, which is an easy win for them compared with medical complaints.

Yeah I agree, and actually last year I - me as a person now - did have a legitimate medical PALS complaint so saw how the procedure is.

In this fictitious fine situation though, with PALS just not responding, I wonder if the person should treat these cowboy mother lovers like a real company and follow their appeals, expecting a real outcome, or not bother cos it's all just a joke anyway.

At the end of the day very very very few single
tickets ever make it to a court hearing in front of a judge.