Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

    • Mini Miss
    • By Mini Miss 4th Aug 17, 9:33 AM
    • 13Posts
    • 5Thanks
    Mini Miss
    PCN - Keeper Liability
    • #1
    • 4th Aug 17, 9:33 AM
    PCN - Keeper Liability 4th Aug 17 at 9:33 AM
    Hi all, have read through a lot of the posts but would like some help.
    My son received a PCN from a company that are "authorised to manage" an area in our town, (they don't state who by). He had dropped his girlfriend at shops in front of the area, and had to drive through and round then through again after picking her up. Their reason for PCN is non payment for stay and is by camera ANPR of 9 minutes. Using the template on here we sent the following in on email through their site:
    You issued me with a parking charge notice on 27th July 2017, received by post on 01st August 2017, but I believe it was unfairly issued. I decline your invitation to name the driver, which is not required of me as the keeper of the vehicle. I will not be paying your demand for payment for the following reasons:
    • The alleged contravention did not occur
    This is due to the fact that it was not parked in the area for the 9 minutes stated on the notice you have sent me, as it had been round after dropping someone and then returning to collect them, meaning you had no authority to issue a ticket.
    • There was insufficient signage
    The car park in question has no clear signage to explain what the relevant parking restrictions are regarding driving through the area. This means no contract can be formed with the landowner and all tickets are issued illegally. Your company states it is an accredited member of the British Parking Association (BPA), which states (in a code of practice outlined by the trade association which all its members must abide by or it could face disciplinary action) that a "reasonable grace period" should be given to drivers. A time period of 9 minutes should be considered reasonable.
    • The vehicle was not parked on the land in question
    You issued a ticket for supposedly breaking your parking restrictions yet the vehicle was not actually parked in the carpark you specify, but had been round after dropping someone at the shops and then returning to collect them meaning you had no authority to issue a ticket.
    • The charge is disproportionate and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss
    The amount you have charged is not based upon any genuine pre-estimate of loss to your company or the landowner. In this case, the £100 charge you are asking for far exceeds the cost to the landowner. Thus the £100 amount you are asking for is excessive.
    • Should you choose to reject my appeal on the above grounds I would require the following information:
    1. Who is the party that contracted with your company and are they the landowner?
    2. Is your charge based on damages for breach of contract? Answer yes or no.
    3. Please provide photos of the signs that you say were on site, which you contend formed a contract with the driver.
    4. Please provide all photographs taken of this vehicle.
    5. Please provide proof that the timing of any camera or timer used was synchronized with all other cameras and/or systems & machines.
    Do not send debt collector letters and do not add any costs, which would be a thinly-veiled attempt at 'double recovery'. I will not respond to debt collectors and to involve a third party would be a failure to mitigate your costs as well as deliberate and knowing misuse of my information.
    If you choose to pursue me please be aware that I will not enter into any correspondence and this will be the only communication you will receive from me until you answer the specific points raised in my appeal.
    I deny liability for any sum at all and you must consider this email a Section 10 Notice under the DPA. You are required to respond within 21 days. I have kept proof of submission of this appeal and look forward to your reply.
    We got this back:
    "The registered keeper is liable for payment of the unpaid Parking Charge Notice if they are unable to provide us with the driver’s details at the time the Parking Charge Notice was issued.
    Please refer to Protections of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule four, paragraph four for further details on this.
    If you are able to provide us with the drivers details at the time the Parking Charge Notice was issued we will contact them directly. If you cannot provide us with these details we will have no option but to pursue the claim against you as the registered keeper".
    I've read it and others posts here which imply he doesn't have to say, they haven't responded to any of the questions, do we just go back with the appeal reasons again, saying driver irrelevant to reason for appeal?
Page 2
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 15th Aug 17, 12:00 AM
    • 58,460 Posts
    • 71,968 Thanks
    Bravo, that will do!

    Submit that POPLA appeal uploaded as a PDF under 'other' on the POPLA website and look out for POPLA emails in August/September.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • Mini Miss
    • By Mini Miss 15th Aug 17, 9:10 PM
    • 13 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    Mini Miss
    Thanks a million for all your guidance, will convert to PDF and upload tonight, will let you know what happens,
    Okay it's "in progress" fingers crossed
    Last edited by Mini Miss; 15-08-2017 at 11:24 PM. Reason: Update
    • Mini Miss
    • By Mini Miss 11th Sep 17, 9:56 PM
    • 13 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    Mini Miss
    Well everyone, have had the verdict from POPLA as the operator didn't provide any evidence, they allow the appeal, so thank you on behalf of us both. I can copy over the full answer if you want to view it tomorrow
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

3,580Posts Today

7,912Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • RT @LaraLewington: ...and mine suggested I'd achieved a lifelong ambition of being sawn in half by a magician - at our wedding. Wasn't. Don?

  • We are working on it - I think BA has behaved awfully on this. Those flight were no obviously a glitch. It should?

  • RT @thenicolabryant: Absolutely. We need mental health and financial health as advocated my @MartinSLewis , to be taught in schools. So muc?

  • Follow Martin