PCN FOR NOT DISPLAYING PERMIT IN OWN ALLOCATED BAY

UnfairCharges

Ok

Thanks

Appreciate the prompt and direct response

Coupon-mad

Yep it doesn't matter either way.

You won't win on appeal - I tell friends not to bother - but parking cases are 99% winnable in court these days because so many of them just discontinue defended claims.

UnfairCharges

Have now received the following in the post

Car1980

Looks a mess and not POFA compliant.

Missing this:
8. (f) warn the keeper that if, at the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to keeper is given—

(they seem to be confused and have used this instead: (d) (ii) which states "(ii)no later than the end of the day before the day on which the notice is either sent by post", which is only for cases where part payment has been made.)

It says "if after the 28 day period specified above" but there is no 28 days period above.

And "the period of parking that immediately preceded" isn't a period. A period can't be an unspecified nanosecond, or a thousand years.

(2)The notice must—

(a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;

Also missing

8. (e) (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;

Coupon-mad

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82153803#Comment_82153803

Not that the kangaroo court of the IAS will agree though. Best ignored unless a claim form arrives or if the OP moves house.

Car1980

Yep, keep that in your back pocket and ignore for now.

Get back to the lease issue because ultimately you want to know if you are under any obligation to take part. If it's LA housing you can make Freedom of Information enquiries no?