URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
  HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 21668--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Civil enforcement (CE) B10 PCN
   DIR By: DWMB2
       Date: May 6, 2024, 5:17 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I'd personally include more detail of exactly how and why you
       don't believe the notice is compliant. State what PoFA requires,
       and what they have included, and why you contend this is not
       sufficient.
       Can you show us the photos you have of the signage at the site
       to back up your arguments about the signage?
       It's hard to offer any feedback on the merits of your argument
       on signage without seeing your evidence of its prominence and
       quality.
       #Post#: 21671--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Civil enforcement (CE) B10 PCN
   DIR By: b789
       Date: May 6, 2024, 5:44 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Rather than blindly copy & paste someone else’s POPLA appeal,
       you may want to proof read it and actually try and understand
       what you are putting across. Check your numbering as you have
       two #3 sections. Check your paragraph spacing.
       You may want to emphasise to the assessor in your opening point
       that you can see the attempt by the operator to use some wording
       from PoFA in the NtK to hold the keeper liable but without the
       strict requirements of the Act being fully applied, it cannot be
       deemed almost fully compliant.
       As also mentioned by [member=103]DWMB2[/member], do you have any
       comparative photos of the actual signage at the location? Some
       assessors will simply say that because there is signage at the
       location, the operator must have the permission of the landowner
       because the BPA “audit” all their members. They do not, in the
       strict sense of the word.
       #Post#: 21674--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Civil enforcement (CE) B10 PCN
   DIR By: b789
       Date: May 6, 2024, 6:48 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Having done a bit more research, it will be interesting to see
       whether the POPLA appeal is rejected and CE try to issue a claim
       in the county court against the defendant as “keeper” under
       PoFA.
       I think it has not been emphasised enough, to date, that a claim
       against the “keeper” as opposed to the “driver” cannot be made
       for more than the amount of the unpaid parking related charges
       as they stood when the notice to the “keeper” was issued, which
       are £100 (in this example).
       The reasoning for the above statement is that PoFA 4(5) states:
       4(5) The maximum sum which may be recovered from the keeper by
       virtue of the right conferred by this paragraph is the amount
       specified in the notice to keeper under paragraph 8(2)(c) or (d)
       or, as the case may be, 9(2)(d) (less any payments towards the
       unpaid parking charges which are received after the time so
       specified).
       The explanatory notes to the legislation
  HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/notes/division/5/1/3/3<br
       />at 221 state:
       “The creditor may not make a claim against the keeper of a
       vehicle for more than the amount of the unpaid parking related
       charges as they stood when the notice to the driver was issued
       (paragraph 4(5)).
       So, if a claim is issued against a defendant, holding them
       liable as “keeper” under PoFA, the claim cannot include the fake
       debt recovery costs. Any claim for more than the original £100
       (or whatever amount was stated in the original NtK) is an abuse
       of process and therefore unreasonable behaviour by the claimant.
       * Explanatory Notes are documents that typically accompany
       primary legislation (e.g. an Act or Measure). The text is
       created by the government department responsible for the subject
       matter of the Act (or Measure) to explain what the Act sets out
       to achieve and to make the Act accessible to readers who are not
       legally qualified. Explanatory Notes were introduced in 1999 and
       accompany all Public Acts except Appropriation, Consolidated
       Fund, Finance and Consolidation Acts.
       The Explanatory Note is intended to give a concise and clear
       statement of the substance of the instrument. The instrument
       itself may also be accompanied by a separate explanatory
       document.
       *****************************************************
       Page 2 of 2
   DIR Previous Page