Letter Before Claim - UKPPO

Elmo111 · 13 April 2018 at 5:21PM

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Brilliant. It would be interesting if you popped in to 'see' them to chase up a reply. Take someone with you, these companies are rough.

Hi Coupon-Mad,

So Karen just replied with a copy of the PCN tickets...not the NTK's as requested, here is the full reply from her.

************
Attached evidence of the notice to keeper for the 4 PCN's

The site in question is subject to terms and conditions, which are stated on signs throughout the area. Those signs clearly state: “Parking Is Restricted To Vehicles Displaying A Valid Permit Only”, see attached.

On the dates quoted to you, the vehicle was observed parked and unattended without the appropriate permit.

As previously stated, numerous letters were sent to the postal address of the Registered Keeper, whose address was obtained via a legal document from the DVLA. Without evidence to the contrary, I must presume that these letters were delivered and received. To reiterate, if there has been a problem regarding the delivery of the documentation to your address, then this is a matter to raise with your postal service.

A new Law from 1st October 2012 (part of the Protection of Freedoms Act) changed liability for parking on private land from the driver of the vehicle to the vehicle’s registered keeper, unless the keeper clearly identifies who was driving the car at the time.

Kind regards

Karen
UKPPO Legal Department

************

Pretty sure I asked for the proof of postings, to which she's not attached. She did however attach this photo of the signage contractual terms from July 2013...

hxxp://!!!!!!/UKPPOJuly2013Signage

nosferatu1001 · 13 April 2018 at 5:55PM

[url]Http://!!!!!!/UKPPOJuly2013Signage[/url]

Those will be the NtK, according to the email. They dint have to be called "NtK" just be sent to the keeper.

She csn presume all she wants, but if they lack proof of posting - they do - and you can state these were not received, then they weren't received. Four docs going missing is unlikely, it's much more likely they never sent them in the first place.

I'd respond staying - I presume therefore you have no proof of posting for any of the notices?

Castle · 13 April 2018 at 6:40PM

Elmo111 wrote: »

Pretty sure I asked for the proof of postings, to which she's not attached. She did however attach this photo of the signage contractual terms from July 2013...

hxxp://!!!!!!/UKPPOJuly2013Signage

Did they really say this was from 2013, because UKPPO Ltd was dormant until 1st April 2015 and couldn't offer a contract; (also they were in the BPA until November 2015).

Redx · 13 April 2018 at 6:52PM

you are doing a good job so far , keep it up, dont believe all they are telling you either, but you can believe the replies in this thread by the regulars on here

keep up the email tennis etc, they should comply with those new PaP rules and so keep at them for all that info you are asking for, and ensure you get those dates from the DVLA too

as the driver has not been identified they would have to try and use POFA2012 to go after the keeper, plus as mentioned above there may be issues with the company not being "live" , never mind anything else they will have tripped up on , like proof of posting (not "signed for" as its clear nobody signed for anything at all)

it only gets serious if they issue an MCOL from Northampton CCBC to your current address , but with help from people on here you stand a good chance of seeing them off in court too

even if you lost it may be for a lower figure , plus if you win you can claim back costs

looking at that google map info, they dont seem too far from me , lol , in fact I will be going somewhere on that map tomorrow evening, but I wont be paying them a visit

ps:- if this is FORBIDDING SIGNAGE and no offer to park then its a matter for the landowner and trespass against the driver (if known) - surely ?

Coupon-mad · 13 April 2018 at 6:55PM

Ask again for the NTKs and give her a little sarcastic lesson in the 'new law' of the GDPR and your right to data. You want the NTKs.

Elmo111 · 15 April 2018 at 10:12PM

Castle wrote: »

Did they really say this was from 2013, because UKPPO Ltd was dormant until 1st April 2015 and couldn't offer a contract; (also they were in the BPA until November 2015).

Evening Castle,

It looks like they've renamed the original document to 'Contractual Notice.pdf', but the title upon creation in Illustrator was 'Parking Patrol july2013'. Even opening the PDF document they sent, if you open it in the Chrome/Acrobat, the document even shows the original PDF title in the top... 'Parking Patrol july2013'. Clearly another blundering mistake from UKPPO, but I'm pretty sure I can't use this as a defence.

hxxp://!!!!!!/ukpposignage - is a view of the actual document details for further inspection.

@nosferatu1001 - Karen has literally just sent a scanned/digital copy of each PCN stuck to the car - is that accepted as an NtK? I've also responded in an e-mail this evening asking again for the proof of purchase.

@Coupon-Mad - I've also thrown in a little bit about GDPR, looking forward to their response on this!

@Redx - Awaiting the reply from the DVLA, this could take up to 7 days apparently! Also when you say FORBIDDING SIGNAGE, does this mean that UKPPO almost have no right in issuing PCN's at all?

Thanks again everyone!

Elmo111 · 15 April 2018 at 11:38PM

Also for those intrigued,

In the most recent e-mail from Karen, this is an example of the NTK that UKPPO supposedly send.

hxxp://!!!!!!/UKPPO-PCNorNTK

Would they really send this in the post to a keeper? Also take note of the first paragraph below the supposed contravention:

"...The driver is liable for this charge."

Karen states in her most recent reply

"A new Law from 1st October 2012 (part of the Protection of Freedoms Act) changed liability for parking on private land from the driver of the vehicle to the vehicle!!!8217;s registered keeper."

Any comments or thoughts are appreciated, as always!

clowni · 16 April 2018 at 12:27AM

good work, well done

Coupon-mad · 16 April 2018 at 12:43AM

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WbYpgmlWQ5uDaKwZRIqxfcQeJgA7UVso/view

Would they really send this in the post to a keeper?

No. That is not a Notice to Keeper.

Google UKPPO Notice to Keeper and search Google Images and you will find one, it's a letter. Not a PCN, that is NOT a NTK.

Also take note of the first paragraph below the supposed contravention:
"...The driver is liable for this charge."

That's actually true and they have to say that on a windscreen initial PCN, because in the first 28 days the driver is the only liable party.

It's only after they then get DVLA data of the registered keeper, and if they then serve a compliant NTK letter* between day 29 and day 56 of the parking event, that they can transfer liability to the Keeper.

Point that out to the fragrant 'Karen' and ask for the NTKs, again!

*CLUE: they won't have served a fully compliant one (statutory wording) and I bet she won't have a copy!

Castle · 16 April 2018 at 10:08AM

Elmo111 wrote: »

Evening Castle,

It looks like they've renamed the original document to 'Contractual Notice.pdf', but the title upon creation in Illustrator was 'Parking Patrol july2013'. Even opening the PDF document they sent, if you open it in the Chrome/Acrobat, the document even shows the original PDF title in the top... 'Parking Patrol july2013'. Clearly another blundering mistake from UKPPO, but I'm pretty sure I can't use this as a defence.

hxxp://!!!!!!/ukpposignage - is a view of the actual document details for further inspection.

Is there a bottom half of the contractual Notice; although it won't matter because it might as well be fake.

Tell Karen that they must send time stamped photos of the signs in place on that site on the day the car was parked; because, that's the only contract they can offer the driver.

Letter Before Claim - UKPPO

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free