Hire Vehicle - Carflow Won't Recognise Hirer

ali4390

I have read and reread the newbies thread but can't work out next steps for our situation.

The hirer hired a motorhome and the registered keeper received a PCN with an Issue Date of 10/07 (strangely with a PCN Postal Date of 08/07), due to a carpark overstay of 17 minutes on the 26th June. The keeper responded to Carflow via their website on the 23rd July providing the hirer name and address.

The registered keeper kept receiving letters and so the hirer sent an email on the 10th August reconfirming the hirer details given no confirmation of appeal had been received. Carflow replied on the 17th August advising that they can't discuss anything with the hirer and that they requested additional information from the registered keeper on the 23rd July via email - the registered keeper disputes that they received anything.

The registered keeper responded on the 18th August with a copy of the hire agreement on the 18th August, to which Carflow have responded today (24th August) rejecting the appeal as per below email:

The information we have received from you has not fulfilled the criteria necessary for Carflow to pass the details to the hirer of this vehicle.

The hire agreement provided is not signed. 

The legal authority upon which we rely is Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Please see below Schedule 4, paragraphs 13(2)-(3) of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 which state:

“(2) The creditor may not exercise the right under paragraph 4 to recover from the keeper any unpaid parking charges specified in the notice to keeper if, within the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which that notice was given, the creditor is given—

(a) a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement;
(b) a copy of the hire agreement; and
(c) a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement.

(3) The statement of liability required by sub-paragraph (2)(c) must—

(a) contain a statement by the hirer to the effect that the hirer acknowledges responsibility for any parking charges that may be incurred with respect to the vehicle while it is hired to the hirer;
(b) include an address given by the hirer (whether a residential, business or other address) as one at which documents may be given to the hirer.”

You have not provided the required information and therefore, you are liable as the registered keeper of this vehicle.

Furthermore, Parking Charge Notice (PCN) 2000105498 has an issue date of 10-Jul-26. The representation document you sent to transfer liability was received on 18-Aug-26. Consequently, as we received this appeal outside the 28 day deadline for making an appeal we will not consider the appeal.

In accordance with Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (paragraph 9.2.f), if the parking charge has not been paid in full after 29 days from the date of issue and we do not know both the name and address for service of the driver, we have the right to recover any unpaid part of the parking charge from the registered keeper, subject to Carflow complying with the applicable conditions under Schedule 4 of the Act. The requirements for keeper liability in Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 have now been satisfied because the parking charge has not been paid in full and we do not know both the name and address for service of the driver. If you are a hire company liability now sits with you because you have failed to provide adequate documentation to allow us to transfer liability to the hirer within the correct time frame. As a result, we are required to inform you that in accordance with Schedule 4 of the Act, Carflow now has the right to recover any unpaid part of the parking charge from the registered keeper of the vehicle.

This parking charge remains outstanding.

Is there any way to continue appealing this on the basis that the hirer was identified on the 23rd July and no record of Carflow's subsequent request for information exists (according to the registered keeper)?

The relationship between the registered keeper and the hirer is tense and the former wants the latter to pay, whilst the former is refusing to do so given the scumbag nature of these parking companies.

kryten3000

Carflow are pretending that the hire agreement has to be signed so they can continue to harass the keeper.

ali4390

Can the hirer admit who the driver was so the registered keeper is no longer contacted and therefore stressed, and still avoid paying the fine?

kryten3000

Yes and yes, although it is not a fine.

ali4390

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82113447#Comment_82113447

Fair point, I should have said PCN.

If the hirer does admit that they were driving, what is their first port of call for an appeal? As per the initial template on the newbies thread? I just want to confirm it's not something different once the driver has been admitted.

ali4390

Can anyone advise logical next steps based on this situation, please?

ali4390

The registered keeper has now confirmed who was driving the vehicle so we will see if Carflow respond to that.

Umkomaas

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82117288#Comment_82117288

How can the RK confirm who was driving?

ChirpyChicken

in the alternative the hirer can simply appeal as the driver, car flow are actually quite easy to get cancelled

Bazarius

Para 13 of POFA doesn’t apply at all because the PCN was deemed given outside the Relevant Period of 14 days - an NTK issued on Day 14 automatically fails that requirement - it probably doesn’t reference 9.2(f) pofa warning anyway .

There is no legal obligation for a keeper to provide a parking company with a copy of any signed agreement.

@Coupon-mad - this looks like a good example to refer Workflow to the CMA with a complaint , given their misleading statement about Para 13 and keeper liability. POFA cannot apply where the NTK issue date falls on Day 14, yet they’ve told the keeper otherwise.

Coupon-mad

Yes.

@ali4390 what response has come to the named driver?

Please show both sides of the initial PCN, data redacted but showing all dates:

"the registered keeper received a PCN with an Issue Date of 10/07 (strangely with a PCN Postal Date of 08/07),"