C.U.P enforment pcn

Castle

Date of sending Thursday 31st July-deemed received Monday 4th August which is day 16 after the parking event; so, non POFA.

Gr1pr

sandbags89 said:

so out of curiosity,

1) whats the benefit of sending out these template responses, as opposed to just ignoring all correspondence?

2) if they both end in court summons ananyway

1) that dilemma was discussed in detail in a recent thread by ChirpyChicken,  please read it

2) no summons is issued in these civil cases , it's an impossibility 

Coupon-mad

sandbags89 said:

Sorry just wanted to clarify the steps as not gone past the first step before, from what I recall I've always managed to get the landowner to cancel, or years back I use to ignore some.

So to confirm I should send the template with the added line about landowner authority. I assume this will get rejected. I will then get a popla code and send another template to them... Do I expect to get this rejected also? And then what, hope it gets dismissed before any court dates?

To explain in bit more detail, my vehicle was parked off the road in a space on the pavement belonging to a retail shop. Out of business hours so shop is closed. Driver didn't notice the sign. Ironically driver has parked there numerous times (first time being ticketed, cameras must be fairly new) due to the advice of a traffic warden Needed to stop briefly to pop into a shop, warden turned up and advised to park in one of those spaces as they have no authority to ticket there. Anyway..

You will win at POPLA if you spell out that the date the NTK was deemed delivered was 4th August which is too late for keeper liability.

You could also add that point (now) to the appeal to CUP and remove this stuff, which isn't relevant to you:

"If the allegation concerns a PDT machine, the data supplied in response to this appeal must include the record of payments made - showing partial VRNs - and an explanation of the reason for the PCN, because your Notice does not explain it.

If the allegation involves an alleged overstay of minutes, your evidence must include the actual grace period agreed by the landowner."

Make sure you DO NOT add any words that imply who parked. Appeal as keeper.

YOU WILL WIN AT POPLA.

sandbags89

Gr1pr said:

sandbags89 said:

so out of curiosity,

1) whats the benefit of sending out these template responses, as opposed to just ignoring all correspondence?

2) if they both end in court summons ananyway

1) that dilemma was discussed in detail in a recent thread by ChirpyChicken,  please read it

2) no summons is issued in these civil cases , it's an impossibility 

Will give it a read, cheers

Coupon-mad said:

sandbags89 said:

Sorry just wanted to clarify the steps as not gone past the first step before, from what I recall I've always managed to get the landowner to cancel, or years back I use to ignore some.

So to confirm I should send the template with the added line about landowner authority. I assume this will get rejected. I will then get a popla code and send another template to them... Do I expect to get this rejected also? And then what, hope it gets dismissed before any court dates?

To explain in bit more detail, my vehicle was parked off the road in a space on the pavement belonging to a retail shop. Out of business hours so shop is closed. Driver didn't notice the sign. Ironically driver has parked there numerous times (first time being ticketed, cameras must be fairly new) due to the advice of a traffic warden Needed to stop briefly to pop into a shop, warden turned up and advised to park in one of those spaces as they have no authority to ticket there. Anyway..

You will win at POPLA if you spell out that the date the NTK was deemed delivered was 4th August which is too late for keeper liability.

You could also add that point (now) to the appeal to CUP and remove this stuff, which isn't relevant to you:

"If the allegation concerns a PDT machine, the data supplied in response to this appeal must include the record of payments made - showing partial VRNs - and an explanation of the reason for the PCN, because your Notice does not explain it.

If the allegation involves an alleged overstay of minutes, your evidence must include the actual grace period agreed by the landowner."

Make sure you DO NOT add any words that imply who parked. Appeal as keeper.

YOU WILL WIN AT POPLA.

Thanks for the breakdown 👍🏼

If the notice date says 31 July, how do I prove it was received at a later date. Just my word against theres no?

1505grandad

Did you read this post today by @Castle?:-

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81581756/#Comment_81581756

Coupon-mad

Coupon-mad said:

sandbags89 said:

Sorry just wanted to clarify the steps as not gone past the first step before, from what I recall I've always managed to get the landowner to cancel, or years back I use to ignore some.

So to confirm I should send the template with the added line about landowner authority. I assume this will get rejected. I will then get a popla code and send another template to them... Do I expect to get this rejected also? And then what, hope it gets dismissed before any court dates?

To explain in bit more detail, my vehicle was parked off the road in a space on the pavement belonging to a retail shop. Out of business hours so shop is closed. Driver didn't notice the sign. Ironically driver has parked there numerous times (first time being ticketed, cameras must be fairly new) due to the advice of a traffic warden Needed to stop briefly to pop into a shop, warden turned up and advised to park in one of those spaces as they have no authority to ticket there. Anyway..

You will win at POPLA if you spell out that the date the NTK was deemed delivered was 4th August which is too late for keeper liability.

You could also add that point (now) to the appeal to CUP and remove this stuff, which isn't relevant to you:

"If the allegation concerns a PDT machine, the data supplied in response to this appeal must include the record of payments made - showing partial VRNs - and an explanation of the reason for the PCN, because your Notice does not explain it.

If the allegation involves an alleged overstay of minutes, your evidence must include the actual grace period agreed by the landowner."

Make sure you DO NOT add any words that imply who parked. Appeal as keeper.

YOU WILL WIN AT POPLA.

Thanks for the breakdown 👍🏼

If the notice date says 31 July, how do I prove it was received at a later date. Just my word against theres no?

No.

Did you miss the word 'deemed'?

sandbags89

No.

Did you miss the word 'deemed'?

yea sorry i wasn't familiar with the term "deem delivered" before, not sure I'm certain what it means now tbh.
 
Maybe I wasn't clear what I meant either. What i was trying to ask was, whats to stop anybody saying "i didn't receive this letter until 20 days after the incident". Is there any expectation of them to prove this, or alternatively is it up to the Enforcement agency to prove otherwise? If that is the case do these NTK get sent out tracked delivery or something similar?

For example, its possible it arrived on the 3rd, but i was working all day and only managed to check the mail on 4th.

I'm not doubting your advice, just trying understand it fully, and playing devils advocate to see what they may comeback with.



anyway, I've drafted a response adding in all the advice from the posts on here. btw Thank you to everyone for their input so far.

I deleted the stuff not related and added the extra stuff suggested in the third paragraph:  

Re PCN number: 49723

I dispute your 'parking charge', as the keeper of the vehicle. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. Since your PCN is a vague template, I require an explanation of the allegation and your evidence. You must include a close up actual photograph of the sign you contend was at the location on the material date as well as your images of the vehicle.

C.U.P Enforcement have no landowner authority, or contractual agreement with myself as the registered keeper. The notice to keeper was also received on 4th August 2025, 16 days after the alleged 'contravention date', which does not comply with the requirements of the Protection of Freedoms Act (2012). For these reasons, the PCN is invalid and should be cancelled.

THE NAME AND POSTAL ADDRESS OF THE KEEPER (OR THE HIRER/LESSEE) GOES HERE, OR IN THE RELEVANT BOX ON THEIR APPEALS PAGE.

Coupon-mad

The point is that the law defines the 'deemed delivered' date. So your appeal should say:

The notice to keeper was deemed delivered (POFA 2012 definition) and was also received on 4th August 2025, 

sandbags89

understood. updated.

ok so will send that appeal off then and wait to see what happens 



Re PCN number: 49723

I dispute your 'parking charge', as the keeper of the vehicle. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. Since your PCN is a vague template, I require an explanation of the allegation and your evidence. You must include a close up actual photograph of the sign you contend was at the location on the material date as well as your images of the vehicle.

C.U.P Enforcement have no landowner authority, or contractual agreement with myself as the registered keeper. Furthermore, the notice to keeper was deemed delivered (POFA 2012 definition) and was also received on 4th August 2025, 16 days after the alleged 'contravention date', which does not comply with the requirements of the Protection of Freedoms Act (2012). For these reasons, the PCN is invalid and should be cancelled.

THE NAME AND POSTAL ADDRESS OF THE KEEPER (OR THE HIRER/LESSEE) GOES HERE, OR IN THE RELEVANT BOX ON THEIR APPEALS PAGE.

sandbags89

Just went online to pay and noticed they had more evidence than on the original paper ntk.
The appeal template requests that they provide more close up photos of vehicle and signage, which they seem to have online. Should i then remove that from the appeal template?

shows 5 photos of the vehicle from same angle ranging from times 19;06-19:13