Group Nexus / CP Plus Ltd PCN ...already appealed

piggypower

doubledotcom said:

FYI, no recently issued NtK by GroupNexus is PoFA compliant because the creditor is not identified. PoFA para 9(2)(h) says that the Notice MUST identify the creditor and specify how and to whom payment or notification to the creditor may be made.

All their NtKs fail PoFA 9(2)(h) because they don't identify the “creditor”. Their notices are branded “GroupNexus” and say that is a trading name of CP Plus Ltd, yet since March 2024 “GroupNexus Ltd” exists as a separate legal entity. Their NtKs do not state which legal person is the creditor: CP Plus Ltd (02595379) or GroupNexus Ltd (15560549). Ambiguity between two distinct companies (same directors, same address) is a material failure of PoFA 9(2)(h).

If they cannot even identify who the creditor is, keeper liability cannot arise.

very interesting, if a bit above my intellect to understand. 

I would guess too, its a bit late as I cant appeal the appeal with this incredibly well thought out rebuttal. 

doubledotcom

It would be a useful defence point if it ever went to court,

piggypower

doubledotcom said:

It would be a useful defence point if it ever went to court,

 I do hope it doesnt... my time v the cost of the parking charge is to be considered for me. 

But as I see it in the threads of instructions, solicitors letter is likely next and this will be used as part of the reply. 

Coupon-mad

piggypower said:

doubledotcom said:

It would be a useful defence point if it ever went to court,

 I do hope it doesn't... my time v the cost of the parking charge is to be considered for me. 

Not really. Defending is easier than appealing and it would be madness to pay a scam to make it go away, when defending is so very easy and almost no case reaches a hearing.

sonik991

piggypower said:

doubledotcom said:

FYI, no recently issued NtK by GroupNexus is PoFA compliant because the creditor is not identified. PoFA para 9(2)(h) says that the Notice MUST identify the creditor and specify how and to whom payment or notification to the creditor may be made.

All their NtKs fail PoFA 9(2)(h) because they don't identify the “creditor”. Their notices are branded “GroupNexus” and say that is a trading name of CP Plus Ltd, yet since March 2024 “GroupNexus Ltd” exists as a separate legal entity. Their NtKs do not state which legal person is the creditor: CP Plus Ltd (02595379) or GroupNexus Ltd (15560549). Ambiguity between two distinct companies (same directors, same address) is a material failure of PoFA 9(2)(h).

If they cannot even identify who the creditor is, keeper liability cannot arise.

very interesting, if a bit above my intellect to understand. 

I would guess too, it’s a bit late as I cant appeal the appeal with this incredibly well thought out rebuttal. 

I’ve been issued one though last month so I’m guessing that I can use this to appeal?

Coupon-mad

Tenuous and won't work at POPLA.

piggypower

been trying for the last two weeks to complain to the manager of Moto Chieveley Services. They have a phone number listed on their website, first attempt; manager isnt here, email this email. 
Emailed the email. 
No response. 
Emailed to chase. No response. 
Rang today, two weeks after emailing initially and got duty manager. He doesnt know when the actual manager will be at work to take a call. 
He said there is nothing they can do about the PCN as the parking company manages the parking and they have a contract. I disagreed firmly. But he kept saying they cant do anything about it. It took a lot of firm statements to get him to at least check the emails and reply to at least one of them. I also asked for an email for the manager but he said there is no other way to try and contact the actual manager other than the one phone number, which often doesnt get picked up and the email that no one replies to. 

brilliant. 

The shocking level of management and customer service in general is unreal these days. 

Coupon-mad

Never mind. Await the Claim Form.