PCS acting for AM Parking £120 Notice to Keeper

SpinninginInfinity

Hi all,

A relative has received a Notice to Keeper from PCS acting for AM Parking claiming £120. Can I please confirm that.

This would make the NTK POFA 2012 non- compliant for Keeper Liability as this exceeds the £100 permissible on a Notice to Keeper? I can't find the relevant terms within schedule 4 so wanted to check. If anyone could point me to the section that would be great.

This was preceded by a Notice to Driver.  The Notice to Keeper was received outside of the POFA 2012  56 days following the day after the event, however the date on the NTK (Date sent) was about a week before receipt, not sure if it's dodgy post or they've backdated it but any advice in presenting an appeal on this point would be good.

Thanks for all your help.

Cheers

SII

Coupon-mad

Yes you can. The sum exceeds the maximum in the Joint Code of Practice.

Please show the £120 NTK. Both sides.

SpinninginInfinity

Many thanks Coupon Mad. I'll be asking the Keeper when I see them.

SpinninginInfinity

Please see below. If time allows if anyone's got any areas where the NTK fails POFA 2012 for Keeper Liability that would be fantastic.

1505grandad

Can you post a copy of the Notice to Driver  -  was one on the windscreen at the parking event?

SpinninginInfinity

Of course Notice to Driver @Coupon-mad @1505grandad and others

Car1980

No period of parking on that ticket, only the time of issue.

No description of circumstances in which the requirement arose (including the means by which it was brought to the attention of drivers).


https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4

Coupon-mad

SpinninginInfinity said:

Notice to Driver 

SpinninginInfinity said:

Please see below. If anyone's got any areas where the NTK fails POFA 2012 for Keeper Liability that would be fantastic.

Car1980 said:

No period of parking on that ticket, only the time of issue.

No description of circumstances in which the requirement arose (including the means by which it was brought to the attention of drivers).

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4

And because it is unlawfully demanding £120, this NTK (issued by Debt Recovery Plus, who take a commission from the PPC to do this work and know FULL WELL what the law and Code says):

-  fails to 'repeat the information in the NTD' about the outstanding parking charges, so it fails POFA 2012 (no keeper liability is possible), and

-  fails to comply with the industry code cap of £100, therefore

- it is also in breach of the DMCC Act because they claim to be operating under the Code of Practice. That's untrue and in consumer law that's a 'misleading omission' which is a proper offence!

SpinninginInfinity

Thank you very much @Coupon-mad and @Car1980.

Car1980 excuse my ignorance but I'm not entirely sure how POFA 2012, sched 4

"No description of circumstances in which the requirement arose (including the means by which it was brought to the attention of drivers)"

relates to the Keepers case .

Coupon-mad. I hadn't even considered  breaches under the DMCC Act. I know of many who have received these £120 NTKs from PCS ,so my next stop will have to be the BPA and ICO.  The keeper has requested a SAR to get the process rolling

Kind of makes me hope they'll refuse the appeal and refer to POPLA.

and what is it with this new trend where PPCs can't be bothered to process their own cases anymore?

SII

Coupon-mad

That's not a new trend, it's something very small firms do.

SpinninginInfinity

I've decided to escalate. Regarding the £120 Notice to Keeper (and I've seen a lot of these from various parties) who is culpable AM Parking or PCS (DC Plus)? AM Parking is very clearly the data controller as per their ICO registration and privacy policy, but the NTK has been send from PCS.