All Parking Services UK Ltd

aaz911

Hi all,

Newbie here i have read the newbies thread, i will be using the one size fits all as the first appeal. I recieved the below ntk in the post. it looks like it's not POFA worded. Can someone please confirm.

cooldude255220

Paragraph 9(2)(a) of Schedule 4 requires that the notice must: specify the period of parking to which the notice relates.

I can't see a period of parking mentioned.

Paragraph 9(2)(b) of Schedule 4 requires that the notice must: inform the keeper that the driver is required to pay parking charges in respect of the specified period of parking and that the parking charges have not been paid in full.

They haven't said that the parking charges have not be paid in full.

Paragraph 9(2)(e) of Schedule 4 requires that the notice must: state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver… This is separate to the warning which has been given which is required by Paragraph 9(2)(f).

The Notice does not include this information.

I agree it's not POFA worded.

Le_Kirk

You could also try looking on the: -

A thread of Pictures of parking firm NTKs

compiled by @Coupon-mad

ETA. I see it has been added, was it on the thread already?

cooldude255220

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81916939#Comment_81916939

I couldn't see one when I searched earlier.

Le_Kirk

This one: -

9 March at 10:08PM

But it is the one from this thread so not a previous one!

aaz911

thanks for the help guys.

Should i stick to one size fits all in blue or modify it to include no POFA?

cooldude255220

Definitely appeal on the grounds above.

Personally I'm not a huge fan of the one-size-fits-all one, but especially when you have better points available to you.

I would appeal as follows:

—

Compliance with Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 is a relevant issue in this case because the operator has issued the PCN to me on the basis that I am the registered keeper of the vehicle in question.

1. There is no allegation within the PCN that I was driving the vehicle in question.
2. The form and substance of the Notice is clearly intended to allow the operator to avail themselves of the of the keeper liability provisions of Schedule 4 of the Act.
3. This appeal must therefore be decided with reference to the basis on which the PCN has - in fact - been issued. That basis is that I am the keeper, not the driver. 
4. Whether the operator may, could, or might at some future point pursue me on the basis that I am alleged to be the driver is irrelevant to this appeal.

A creditor only has the right to recover unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the vehicle under paragraph 4(1) of Schedule 4 where the criteria in paragraph 4(2) of Schedule 4 are met.

Paragraph 4(2)(a) requires that the conditions in paragraphs 5, 6, 11 and 12 (so far as applicable) are met.

Paragraph 6(1)(b) requires that a Notice to Keeper is given accordance with paragraph 9.

Paragraph 9(2)(a) of Schedule 4 requires that the notice must: specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates

The Notice does not include this information. This is fatal to the right to recover from the keeper.

Paragraph 9(2)(b) of Schedule 4 requires that the notice must: inform the keeper that the driver is required to pay parking charges in respect of the specified period of parking and that the parking charges have not been paid in full.

The Notice does not include this information. This is fatal to the right to recover from the keeper.

Paragraph 9(2)(e) of Schedule 4 requires that the notice must: state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper (i) to pay the unpaid parking charges; or (ii) if the keeper was not the driver of the vehicle, to notify the creditor of the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and to pass the notice on to the driver. This is separate to the warning which has been given which is required by Paragraph 9(2)(f).

The Notice does not include this information. This is fatal to the right to recover from the keeper.

aaz911

Morning,

The check box for ‘i was the driver of the vehicle’

Put that as no right?

cooldude255220

Can you submit the form without filling that in, or is it a mandatory field?

aaz911

It’s mandatory

cooldude255220

How computer-savvy are you?

If you right click on the textbox, and select the inspect element option, you should see something like the below.

(This is taken from a different form, so it won't be identical)

What you're looking for is the word "required", which I've highlighted. You should be able to click on it and delete that word.

The form may then allow you to submit it without filling it in (it also might not, if they validate the submission server-side).

If it doesn't work, or if you can't do it, then you will either need to decide to write to them (as per the back of the PCN) or decide how to answer that. But clearly you don't want to - and should not have to - identify whether or not you were the driver.

Really, that question should not be mandatory. Just another scummy tactic.