Incomplete vrn entered

pjr1525_2 · 17 April 2018 at 1:33PM

I'm warming to this now, knowing they can't arrest, take my house or get a CCJ against me without a court adjudication.
Just a thought, if they say the parking ticket was invalid because the full vrn was not entered correctly, does that mean there was no contract entered into, and they or the land owner can only pursue the keeper for trespass? Again, would appreciate advice.

nosferatu1001 · 17 April 2018 at 1:48PM

No it doesnt mean that. they will claim you agreed to the contract and didnt fulfill all terms - which is what theyre already saying. It makes no difference.

They cannot pursue the keeper for trespass, as that is outside of what POFA allows. POFA lets them go for PARKING charges, nothing else.

Any error on a ticket is de minimis .

Coupon-mad · 17 April 2018 at 2:19PM

if they say the parking ticket was invalid because the full vrn was not entered correctly, does that mean there was no contract entered into,

They will try, but no, there was a contract made, an offer/acceptance happened and this was it:

I had entered the first four digits of the vrn as some car parks that I have used previously required. This information positively identified the ticket related to the car on which it was displayed.

You can argue that to penalise you for entering the first 4 digits - which did uniquely identify your car - is not saved by the fact-specific (and completely different) Beavis case. In fact this is just the sort of non-commercially justified penalty that the Supreme Court had in mind when they discussed the fact the Lord Dunedin's 4 tests for a penalty had application in most ordinary, transactional (paying a fee/tariff) cases.

You can also argue that by accepting a 4 digit VRN that was not in the car park, their systems are set to form an 'alternative contract'.

There is also the fact the machines are set to allow and profit from consumer error, which is unfair under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and the CPUTRs 2008, and easily avoidable by better data handling processes and checks in the system. And they are responsible for that.

4 digits is in 99% of cases, not a full VRN so the machine should be set to prevent minor errors and flash a reminder 'are you sure? We need you to enter the whole VRN, press Y or N' or 'clear' to start again and enter the full VRN to avoid a parking charge of £100.'

pjr1525_2 · 17 April 2018 at 4:02PM

This is fascinating stuff. It's quite early in this episode, one week, so don't know if they will pursue the matter. Ordinarily I would pay (if guilty) for a quiet life, but I feel so angry that they want £100 from me , even after I provided proof that I ,as an occupant of the car, had, fairly, paid in full for the service. Surely to any right minded person, including Judges, that should be the end of the matter. I appreciate that I am being naive for believing that. As previously mentioned, I intend to defend this unfair charge right to the end. Many thanks.

Quentin · 17 April 2018 at 5:34PM

You say you are appealing this as keeper (#6)

Throughout here you are advised never to reveal who was driving.

You need to edit your posts #1 & #15 to remove details of who was driving.

The Ppcs monitor this forum and can use your posts against you

If you are identifyable from your forum name then ask MSE to change it to something completely anonymous

pjr1525_2 · 17 April 2018 at 6:07PM

Many thanks Quentin, I'm done with appealing now, because the information on this and other forums suggests that the game is not straight. I have never identified the driver nor intend to, because they are of a very nervous disposition, either in the initial in house appeal or in this forum. The PCN was a notice to keeper.

Redx · 17 April 2018 at 6:16PM

post #1 IMPLIES that you were the driver, but it seems you were merely an occupant of the vehicle who used the machine and are the KEEPER

it helps in these matters if you only use the following to describe events

the DRIVER

the KEEPER

we consider that the words "ME , MYSELF & I" are banned and not to be used

Quentin · 17 April 2018 at 6:20PM

pjr1525 wrote: »

I have never identified the driver .

Check again!

pjr1525_2 · 18 April 2018 at 11:29AM

Many thanks, checked again and amended to say I was an occupant of the car.

pjr1525_2 · 18 April 2018 at 11:45AM

Took on board the comments that coupon m made about the machine accepting partial VRNs, so I made a visit to the same machine this morning ( on foot ) the coin slot has a gate which prevents coins entering until vehicle details are entered. I Optimistically entered one letter, the letter I for obvious reasons and the screen flashed up " invalid plate " so I entered another letter I, this time the screen said "Press green button for ticket" and no other information. So it actually issued a ticket with the improbable, maybe impossible vrn of " II " the ticket, which I retain, has a number which I believe identifies the machine, also time, date, and amount paid. I appreciate foreign vehicles may use the car park, but "II". As far as I know, Lord Montague owns most if not all of the 2 character plates!. I would appreciate any views on this. Regards.

Incomplete vrn entered

Comments

Categories

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