C.U.P enforment pcn

Umkomaas

kryten3000 said:

The law says 2 working days for delivery,  they have no proof the notice was delivered in time.

But it doesn't matter because you won't be paying regardless

Spot on advice from @kryten3000 above, but you'll need to spell out to POPLA the dates that apply through PoFA to your case.  Unless you tell them, they won't necessarily work it out themselves. 

Sat 19/07 - Day 0 (zero)
Sun 20/07 - Day 1 (as dictated per PoFA)
Mon 21/07 - Day 2
then each day and its date and number running through to ...
Thurs 31/07 - Day 12 (Date of Issue of NtK)
Fri 01/08 - Day 13
Sat 02/08 - Day 14 (not a working day per PoFA)
Sun 03/08 - Day 15 (not a working day per PoFA)
Mon 03/08 - Day 16 (deemed delivered date per PoFA - the second working day after issue)

POPLA have had trouble understanding this in the past. As long as the driver isn't identified, this should be the nailed on reason for the appeal to be upheld. Just spell it out Janet and John stylee!

ChirpyChicken

It is simply printed and fired into the royal mail system like many bulk mailing firms

Coupon-mad

sandbags89 said:

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/xnd5ik1fl7tc52c7hhaou/Recording-4.m4a?rlkey=6hjwiyfbm13p34k4obytcduad&st=mqrg90ip&dl=0

think i did it, link to the recording

Interesting. So they are lying that it is 'one day delivery' because all Postworks does is acts as a mail consolidator which prints the letters, puts them in an envelope THEN puts printed post into the Royal Mail.

Even if it was put in as First class, that is NOT and never claims to be (and nor does the law deem it as) a 'one day delivery' service.

Postworks website says they send NTKs using 'Priority postage' instead of first class. And it typically can take TWO working days (but is not guaranteed):



https://www.postworks.co.uk/priority-postage-what-it-is-and-how-it-can-help-your-business/

This says that Postworks includes tracking for all Royal Mail services, so Unity5 could be sent a SAR to supply the tracking of your NTK (if POPLA fall for this untruth):

https://www.postworks.co.uk/priority-postage-what-it-is-and-how-it-can-help-your-business/

Bottom line: The Certificate of Posting lied.

Shame on you Unity 5.

Call this lie out in your POPLA comments. 

Remind POPLA that a NTK posted using a hybrid mail consolidator delays matters but even if the hybrid mail third party (Postworks in this case) got the letter to Royal Mail that day and used first class postage, the letter is 'deemed delivered' on the second working day, according to the applicable law, POFA 2012. The Certificate of Posting is provably wrong and misleading. The law prevails.

sandbags89

thanks for all the responses and breakdowns guys and girls, will knock up another draft response for the comments and post on here before submitting

sandbags89

DRAFT:

This new supposed 'evidence' provided by CUP Enforcement fails disprove the fact that the NTK was not delivered within the 14 day window, as required according to POFA 2012.

The certificate from Unity 5 contains very little information, apart from a reference number and a claim of a '1 day delivery' via a hybrid email.

After speaking with Unity 5 and gathering information from their website, it is clear that they have in fact lied on the Certificate of posting. Unity 5 do not post the NTK themselves, instead they use a 3rd party company by the name of Postworks, who then acts as a mail consolidator. They print and package the documents and then send them to Royal mail to deliver. The Postworks website clearly states that they send NTKs using 'Priority postage' instead of 1st class, which is typically within two working days, but even that is not guaranteed. So Unity 5 are falsely claiming a 1 day delivery, as no such service is offered from Postworks. 

  

Using multiple different companies to post the NTK is only likely to delay matters. Even if the hybrid mail third party (Postworks in this case) did get the letter to Royal Mail the same day and used 1st class postage, that is not (and never claims to be) nor does the law deem it as, a '1 day delivery' service. Also, the letter would still be 'deemed delivered' on the second working day anyway, according to the applicable law, POFA 2012. 

The Certificate of Posting is provably wrong and intentionally misleading.

9 (5) of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA)

"The relevant period for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4) is the period of 14 days

beginning with the day after that on which the specified period of parking ended.

(6)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."

According to POFA 2012, the days leading up to delivery would be as such:

Sat 19/07/25 - Day 0 (contravention date)

Sun 20/07/25 - Day 1 (as dictated per POFA 2012)

Mon 21/07/25 - Day 2

Tues 22/07/25 - Day 3

Wed 23/07/25 - Day 4

Thurs 24/07/25 - Day 5

Fri 25/07/25 - Day 6

Sat 26/07/25 - Day 7

Sun 27/07/25 - Day 8

Mon 28/07/25 - Day 9

Tues 29/07/25 - Day 10

Wed 30/07/25 - Day 11

Thurs 31/07/25 - Day 12 (Date of Issue for NTK) 

Fri 01/08/25 - Day 13 (1st working day)

Sat 02/08/25 - Day 14 (NOT A WORKING DAY as per POFA 2012)

Sun 03/08/25 - Day 15 (NOT A WORKING DAY as per POFA 2012)

Mon 03/08/25 - Day 16 (2nd working day and the deemed delivered date as per POFA 2012) 

The 14 day deadline was not met, failing to comply with requirements of the Protection of Freedoms Act (2012), which consequently means I, as the registered keeper, cannot legally be held liable. The NTK is not valid.
 

CUP Enforcement have also made no attempt to dispute my other claim that the photographic evidence they acquired was from ANPR camera equipment mounted on an illegally erected advertising pole. The Broxbourne planning website shows no proof of any planning permission, and their own plans submitted to the website suggest that the Camera/Advertising pole is not even on the landowners plot.

kryten3000

Here's a handy calendar for you showing the days and that the date of delivery was day 16. 

sandbags89

Thanks Kryten  will add that on too. Let me know what you guys think of the draft too, thanks

Coupon-mad

You can't embed pictures in POPLA Comments and I'd remove this bit, which POPLA don't consider:

 

"CUP Enforcement have also made no attempt to dispute my other claim that the photographic evidence they acquired was from ANPR camera equipment mounted on an illegally erected advertising pole. The Broxbourne planning website shows no proof of any planning permission, and their own plans submitted to the website suggest that the Camera/Advertising pole is not even on the landowners plot."

Just end it 'The PCN was not properly given' instead of 'The NTK is not valid'.

I warn you now:

I think this POPLA appeal will lose, due to the lie CUP / Unity5 conjured up. Be ready to make a formal complaint to CUP and then to show the BPA your phone call with Unity5 and tell them you will share it with your MP and the MHCLG Parking team.

sandbags89

Coupon-mad said:

You can't embed pictures in POPLA Comments and I'd remove this bit, which POPLA don't consider:

 

"CUP Enforcement have also made no attempt to dispute my other claim that the photographic evidence they acquired was from ANPR camera equipment mounted on an illegally erected advertising pole. The Broxbourne planning website shows no proof of any planning permission, and their own plans submitted to the website suggest that the Camera/Advertising pole is not even on the landowners plot."

Just end it 'The PCN was not properly given' instead of 'The NTK is not valid'.

I warn you now:

I think this POPLA appeal will lose, due to the lie CUP / Unity5 conjured up. Be ready to make a formal complaint to CUP and then to show the BPA your phone call with Unity5 and tell them you will share it with your MP and the MHCLG Parking team.

Ah really 🫤 but even if they lied, surely my counter argument showing that it's incorrect should influence them to make better judgement, you'd hope so anyway. What a pain. Well I guess I'll amend it anyway and hope for the best.

I can see why some people just pay, the amount of time  I've spent writing up appeals and reading forum pages and policies 😅could have made the £60 back ten times over. But I get it, it's the principle.

so if they reject it, what's next apart from complaining as you suggested. I assume popla will say you lost so pay up by a certain date?

Also what is MHCLG... Ministry of housing, communities and local government? Is that a department in the council? 

Coupon-mad

Are you saying you haven't seen the Public Consultation thread and not done it yet?

Gentle nudge: FIGHTBACK ALERT:

Please do the government's Public Consultation. The MHCLG is a Government department in Westminster!

We need every poster to complete this vital survey before the deadline next week.

See this thread:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6617396/parking-code-of-practice-consultation-now-extended-closes-friday-26th-september/p1

We understand that you may need some pointers. It looks laborious, we get that. It doesn't matter; no knowledge is needed except re your own experiences so you can call out a scam industry and you'll protect millions of motorists and help change the law. 

I've written some guidance to help focus new posters on the issues. I've covered almost every question, providing ideas if you agree with our stance on things like DRFs, which we say must be banned.

Ordinary people like you are falling victim to this scam over 18 million times per annum. Motorists need your voice added please.

CLOSES ON FRIDAY 26th SEPTEMBER.