Not Parked Wholly Within Bay

ChirpyChicken

https://appeal.theukps.com/
If it does not work I wouldn't worry 

BMWF30

LoneStarState said:

Check online to 100% make sure UKPS do not have any additional photos of the vehicle.  If that's the case then to be honest, I'd say go at it with the IAS and a complaint to the DVLA.  Absolutely no reasonable cause if no evidence.

Actually, they had additional photos of my car online. What do you think of this guys??

BMWF30

BMWF30 said:

Coupon-mad said:

Gr1pr said:

You could appeal as keeper as described in the first post in the newbies sticky thread in announcements near the top of the forum 

Yes do this AS KEEPER (not saying who was driving) but let's do second stage appeal as well, test the IAS because that final paragraph (on page one) is lying about keeper liability which I think Is in the sanctions.

I've no idea really what the joint code sanctions say because it's a pile of self-serving trash and I don't care what that useless joke of a Code says, but that's not a POFA compliantly worded NTK to hold a keeper liable. See para 9 of schedule 4 for the mandatory requirements.

Therefore that final paragraph is lying.

On the IAS's website, it says that:

Before you appeal to the IAS, you must first appeal to the operator (the company that issued the parking charge).

So I have to do this? With ECP, I didn't 'appeal', because I had a feeling it was a sham. I'll read related paragraphs/schedules of POFA to see what my rights are. Thank you. 

POFA Schedule 4. Para 9. (7) says:

(7)When the notice is given it must be accompanied by any evidence prescribed under paragraph 10.


And Para 10 (2) says:

2)The regulations may in particular make provision as to—

(a)the means by which any prescribed evidence is to be generated or otherwise produced (which may include a requirement to use equipment of a kind approved for the purpose by a person specified in the regulations); or

(b)the circumstances in which any evidence is, or is not, required to accompany a notice to keeper.

I'm guessing that the above is in my favour, because there was no photographic evidence in the notice letter?

Car1980

BMWF30 said:

LoneStarState said:

Check online to 100% make sure UKPS do not have any additional photos of the vehicle.  If that's the case then to be honest, I'd say go at it with the IAS and a complaint to the DVLA.  Absolutely no reasonable cause if no evidence.

Actually, they had additional photos of my car online. What do you think of this guys??

On the line or de minimis.

That's their only evidence, so I would be inclined to ignore. Even if there was a blue moon and a judge looked at it, it would get thrown out.

BMWF30

Car1980 said:

BMWF30 said:

LoneStarState said:

Check online to 100% make sure UKPS do not have any additional photos of the vehicle.  If that's the case then to be honest, I'd say go at it with the IAS and a complaint to the DVLA.  Absolutely no reasonable cause if no evidence.

Actually, they had additional photos of my car online. What do you think of this guys??

On the line or de minimis.

That's their only evidence, so I would be inclined to ignore. Even if there was a blue moon and a judge looked at it, it would get thrown out.

I thought it was petty when I saw the photo! I just have to laugh it off.

Coupon-mad

BMWF30 said:

BMWF30 said:

Coupon-mad said:

Gr1pr said:

You could appeal as keeper as described in the first post in the newbies sticky thread in announcements near the top of the forum 

Yes do this AS KEEPER (not saying who was driving) but let's do second stage appeal as well, test the IAS because that final paragraph (on page one) is lying about keeper liability which I think Is in the sanctions.

I've no idea really what the joint code sanctions say because it's a pile of self-serving trash and I don't care what that useless joke of a Code says, but that's not a POFA compliantly worded NTK to hold a keeper liable. See para 9 of schedule 4 for the mandatory requirements.

Therefore that final paragraph is lying.

On the IAS's website, it says that:

Before you appeal to the IAS, you must first appeal to the operator (the company that issued the parking charge).

So I have to do this? With ECP, I didn't 'appeal', because I had a feeling it was a sham. I'll read related paragraphs/schedules of POFA to see what my rights are. Thank you. 

POFA Schedule 4. Para 9. (7) says:

(7)When the notice is given it must be accompanied by any evidence prescribed under paragraph 10.


And Para 10 (2) says:

2)The regulations may in particular make provision as to—

(a)the means by which any prescribed evidence is to be generated or otherwise produced (which may include a requirement to use equipment of a kind approved for the purpose by a person specified in the regulations); or

(b)the circumstances in which any evidence is, or is not, required to accompany a notice to keeper.

I'm guessing that the above is in my favour, because there was no photographic evidence in the notice letter?

You guess wrong. Para 10 of POFA was never made 'live' by provisions or regulations. Stop looking at an irrelevant, dormant paragraph in schedule 4 that i didn't signpost you to!

It is clear & obvious that this NTK is non-POFA in wording. Please don't ask how! Look at para 9 of POFA. Carefully. Point by point. Any lay person can see several omissions in required words. I really like the lightbulb moment when people see this for themselves.

But it's all in the bin if you write "I, me" when mentioning the lack of evidence of the line of parking. Show us your draft first stage appeal.

Obviously IAS is well known as a kangaroo court but it'll be a good one to see the 'decision'. You'll never pay either way.

BMWF30

Coupon-mad said:

BMWF30 said:

BMWF30 said:

Coupon-mad said:

Gr1pr said:

You could appeal as keeper as described in the first post in the newbies sticky thread in announcements near the top of the forum 

Yes do this AS KEEPER (not saying who was driving) but let's do second stage appeal as well, test the IAS because that final paragraph (on page one) is lying about keeper liability which I think Is in the sanctions.

I've no idea really what the joint code sanctions say because it's a pile of self-serving trash and I don't care what that useless joke of a Code says, but that's not a POFA compliantly worded NTK to hold a keeper liable. See para 9 of schedule 4 for the mandatory requirements.

Therefore that final paragraph is lying.

On the IAS's website, it says that:

Before you appeal to the IAS, you must first appeal to the operator (the company that issued the parking charge).

So I have to do this? With ECP, I didn't 'appeal', because I had a feeling it was a sham. I'll read related paragraphs/schedules of POFA to see what my rights are. Thank you. 

POFA Schedule 4. Para 9. (7) says:

(7)When the notice is given it must be accompanied by any evidence prescribed under paragraph 10.


And Para 10 (2) says:

2)The regulations may in particular make provision as to—

(a)the means by which any prescribed evidence is to be generated or otherwise produced (which may include a requirement to use equipment of a kind approved for the purpose by a person specified in the regulations); or

(b)the circumstances in which any evidence is, or is not, required to accompany a notice to keeper.

I'm guessing that the above is in my favour, because there was no photographic evidence in the notice letter?

You guess wrong. Para 10 of POFA was never made 'live' by provisions or regulations. Stop looking at an irrelevant, dormant paragraph in schedule 4 that i didn't signpost you to!

It is clear & obvious that this NTK is non-POFA in wording. Please don't ask how! Look at para 9 of POFA. Carefully. Point by point. Any lay person can see several omissions in required words. I really like the lightbulb moment when people see this for themselves.

But it's all in the bin if you write "I, me" when mentioning the lack of evidence of the line of parking. Show us your draft first stage appeal.

Obviously IAS is well known as a kangaroo court but it'll be a good one to see the 'decision'. You'll never pay either way.

I copied this from other thread (POPLA appeal submission) and submitted an 'appeal' in their web portal:

The Notice to Keeper (NTK) is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA) due to not giving the evidence required under schedule 4 paragraph 9 sub-paragraph. Under schedule 4, paragraph 9 (7) of the POFA, the notice must be accompanied by any evidence prescribed under paragraph 10. UKPS provided CCTV images of my vehicle but no images of the signage which they allege is displayed on the land that the PCN relates to.

An operator can only establish the liability from the keeper of a vehicle if certain conditions are met as stated in paragraph 9. UKPS have failed to fulfil these conditions in the NTK issued.

Coupon-mad

That's wrong, for the reasons I already explained. Para 10 of Sch4 is completely inert. But you can put it right at IAS stage.

BMWF30

Coupon-mad said:

That's wrong, for the reasons I already explained. Para 10 of Sch4 is completely inert. But you can put it right at IAS stage.

Yes you did. I read Para 9 of Schedule 4 many times last night, but I still didn't get what was not compliant with PoFA in the last paragraph of NTK that you mentioned. 

Coupon-mad

It's not that the last para is non-compliant. That's not what I said.

I said the last para is lying because that NTK has not included the required wording set out in para 9 of POFA.

It is literally spot the difference! Easy to see.