IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including QR codes, number plates and reference numbers.

Meadowhall shopping centre POPLA Appeal CPPlus

Options
1…457910…25

Comments

  • RobinofLoxley
    RobinofLoxley Posts: 296 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post
    Options
    Live link of image of claim form. http://i.cubeupload.com/uGnm3o.png


    Do you know what the ladies that have received the court claim have done about them. Have they responded by acknowledging the claim? This should have been done within 19 days of the issue date of the claim. In the case of the one in the photo, that would be by the 29th July.
  • RobinofLoxley
    RobinofLoxley Posts: 296 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post
    Options
    Yes indeed

    The OP for that claim should be posting on MSE and Pepipoo as well as trying to garner support from any "group " set up. I think any group could be disadvantaged to some extent if the court decides to hear the cases in a similar style to the Indigo cases.

    Meadow Hall used to have PCM infesting their car parks.

    CP Plus do not rely on the provisions of POFA for keeper liability.

    Originally posted by neveradullmoment

    The wording on the NTK states :

    "If this parking charge remains unpaid after a period of 28 days of this notice and we don't know both the name and current address of the driver, we will have the right to recover the charge from you as keeper of the vehicle."

    Even though they don't specifically refer to POFA, surely the only way they can transfer the liability of the parking charge from the driver to the keeper is by utilising POFA 2012, is that not right?
  • DoaM
    DoaM Posts: 11,863 Forumite
    First Post First Anniversary Name Dropper Photogenic
    Options
    Yes, but ... POFA is explicit about what wording needs to be included, and the CP Plus NTK is nowhere near compliant with POFA requirements.
  • RobinofLoxley
    RobinofLoxley Posts: 296 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post
    Options
    DoaM wrote: »
    Yes, but ... POFA is explicit about what wording needs to be included, and the CP Plus NTK is nowhere near compliant with POFA requirements.

    I agree the NTK fails POFA but CP Plus don't mention POFA anywhere, so how can they expect to make the keeper liable for the charge?

    It would be interesting to see a copy of the NTD because I would be surprised if that complies with POFA too.

    Could the OP post and image of the NTD/Windscreen ticket please.
  • PKandF
    PKandF Posts: 19 Forumite
    edited 8 August 2017 at 2:46PM
    Options
    RobinofLoxley wrote: »
    I agree the NTK fails POFA but CP Plus don't mention POFA anywhere, so how can they expect to make the keeper liable for the charge?

    It would be interesting to see a copy of the NTD because I would be surprised if that complies with POFA too.

    Could the OP post and image of the NTD/Windscreen ticket please.

    Front: i.cubeupload.com/RQFdIC.jpg (Apologies, I can't seem to post a direct image).
    Overleaf: i.cubeupload.com/N4QEry.jpg

    I'm certain that the OP's notice to driver would look exactly the same as the one above, as it would appear to be under similar circumstances at the same location.

    Not trying to hijack this at all by the way! I just thought it may help.
  • waamo
    waamo Posts: 10,298 Forumite
    First Post First Anniversary Name Dropper
    Options
    Here you go links converted

    https://u.cubeupload.com/RQFdIC.jpg

    https://u.cubeupload.com/N4QEry.jpg

    Welcome to the whacky world of private parking where companies make up the rules as they go along.
  • RobinofLoxley
    RobinofLoxley Posts: 296 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post
    Options
    PKandF wrote: »
    Front: i.cubeupload.com/RQFdIC.jpg (Apologies, I can't seem to post a direct image).
    Overleaf: i.cubeupload.com/N4QEry.jpg

    I'm certain that the OP's notice to driver would look exactly the same as the one above, as it would appear to be under similar circumstances at the same location.

    Not trying to hijack this at all by the way! I just thought it may help.

    Yes thank you they may be helpful.

    Links for the NTD images

    http://i.cubeupload.com/RQFdIC.jpg
    http://i.cubeupload.com/N4QEry.jpg

    EDIT: Sorry Waamo, you got there before me.
  • PKandF
    PKandF Posts: 19 Forumite
    Options
    Thank-you kindly! I have my own issues with Meadowhall and this lot, soon to be appealed hopefully!
  • DoaM
    DoaM Posts: 11,863 Forumite
    First Post First Anniversary Name Dropper Photogenic
    Options
    RobinofLoxley wrote: »
    I agree the NTK fails POFA but CP Plus don't mention POFA anywhere, so how can they expect to make the keeper liable for the charge?

    I guess I misread what you posted ... I thought you were inferring that as they had some wording about transferring to keeper therefore it must be POFA-compliant. :)
  • RobinofLoxley
    RobinofLoxley Posts: 296 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post
    Options
    waamo wrote: »
    Welcome to the whacky world of private parking where companies make up the rules as they go along.

    You're not wrong there! Unbelievable they are taking people to court for £ thousands based on this nonsense.
This discussion has been closed.
★ ★ ★ Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 343.5K Banking & Borrowing
  • 250.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.9K Spending & Discounts
  • 235.6K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 608.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 173.2K Life & Family
  • 248.2K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards