DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 21982--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC PCN - No Payment - Lower Precinct Shopping Centre,
Coventry
DIR By: b789
Date: May 9, 2024, 12:56 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: _wooky_ link ---
>
> We're still trying to dig out a copy of the contract hire
document. The only thing we've seen so far that references fines
is in a summary letter after we took delivery of the car...
>
--- End Quote ---
But you haven't been "fined" at all. All you received was a
speculative invoice from an unregulated private parking company
for an alleged breach of contract by the the driver of the
vehicle. I'll give you £100 for every occurrence of the word
"fine" in any of the correspondence you've received from the
parking company.
Only a "penalty" charge is a "fine" and only an "authority" such
as a council or the police can issue "fines". An ex-clamper thug
setting up a private parking company is not an "authority" and
cannot issue "fines".
So, you were not "fined" at all. UKPC has failed to provide the
necessary documents with the NtH which would allow it to pass
the charge on to the hirer as required under PoFA 14(2)
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4/enacted.<br
/>UKPC don't know the identity of the driver and you are under
no
legal obligation to give them that information. They cannot hold
you, the keeper liable.
Unfortunately, it is too late to appeal and so you have also
missed the opportunity to appeal to POPLA. No big deal.
You must now ignore all debt collection letters. ZZPS, their
sister company GCTT and QDR solicitors are all scammers/cowboys
who can be safely ignored. None of them have any skin in the
game and are third parties to the contract the driver allegedly
breached. They can do nothing except try and scare the
low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree into paying into their
scam.
UKPC may, at some stage, instruct one of the roboclaim
solicitors, usually DCB Legal or will do so themselves from
their own, recent but inexperienced and intellectually
malnourished internal "legal department", a Letter of Claim.
If/when they issue a Letter of Claim, come back and we'll advise
on a response.
Until that happens, there is nothing else you can do except
weather the useless storm of debt collector letters. Some people
use them as liner for their bottom of a cat litter tray or as
kindling.
The only other suggestion I can make is that you make a
complaint (not an appeal) as the keeper to UKPC advising them
that they have failed to issue the NtH in accordance with the
requirements of PoFA 14(2) and
so cannot hold you, the keeper liable. This is also a breach of
the BPA CoP 21.2 which states:
--- Quote ---
> Schedule 4 of POFA 2012 creates the new legal basis to claim
unpaid parking charges from vehicle keepers and hirers. As long
as the strict conditions of Schedule 4 are met, you may claim
payment from the keeper or the hirer of the vehicle rather than
from the driver. To do this you need to follow the procedures
set out in the Schedule. You can do this whether the parking
originally took place under the terms of a contract or was an
act of trespass.
--- End Quote ---
Depending on their response, you could then report them to the
BPA for contravening their own ATA rules. They have failed to
comply with the requirements of rule 21.2 because they have
failed to follow the strict conditions of PoFA 14(2).
#Post#: 21998--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC PCN - No Payment - Lower Precinct Shopping Centre,
Coventry
DIR By: _wooky_
Date: May 9, 2024, 3:58 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Brilliant. Great advice, thanks 🙏❤️
--- Quote from: b789 link ---
>
>
> The only other suggestion I can make is that you make a
complaint (not an appeal) as the keeper to UKPC advising them
that they have failed to issue the NtH in accordance with the
requirements of PoFA 14(2) and
> so cannot hold you, the keeper liable. This is also a breach
of the BPA CoP 21.2 which states:
>
>
--- End Quote ---
To clarify, we're the hirer, not the keeper. Not sure the above
applies in that case.
Thanks again.
#Post#: 22000--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC PCN - No Payment - Lower Precinct Shopping Centre,
Coventry
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: May 9, 2024, 4:01 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The argument and the relevant section of PoFA is right, just
replace 'keeper' with 'hirer' and the argument still stands
#Post#: 22007--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC PCN - No Payment - Lower Precinct Shopping Centre,
Coventry
DIR By: b789
Date: May 9, 2024, 6:13 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hirer/keeper have the same protection under PoFA. Just change
“keeper” to “hirer” or “hirer/keeper”.
#Post#: 22017--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC PCN - No Payment - Lower Precinct Shopping Centre,
Coventry
DIR By: slapdash
Date: May 10, 2024, 2:35 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=1601]_wooky_[/member]
VWFS had a policy where they would simply pay a second invoice
if received and recharge it to the hirer. It doesn't look as
though they are likely to do this given you have had a debt
collector letter.
They use different agreements for PCH and PCP. Their recent
contract hire agreement included the words "or charges". (At
least the one I have seen does)
(Your description suggests the vehicle is PCH, however the
fragment you posted looks like a PCP, though it does mention
they tax it which is a PCH thing).
If they do happen to pay it a different approach will be needed.
#Post#: 22038--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC PCN - No Payment - Lower Precinct Shopping Centre,
Coventry
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: May 10, 2024, 5:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Aren't we off-course.
The creditor is UKPC, not Skoda.
I cannot find anything in Skoda's correspondence which suggests
they'll make any financial demands upon you other than they
receive a 'second notification'.
But IMO you have no reason to think they will because:
UKPC have sent you a NTH;
And a Final Demand;
And an unseen letter(from a 'debt collector').
IMO, ignore Skoda* as regards the NTH, they're a distraction
from what you should be doing which is appealing/writing to
UKPC.
Apparently the UKPC we site won't let you appeal.
None the less, you should write to them and appeal.
Why?
Because it's what a normal motorist would do who has taken the
time to establish the relative legal positions of the creditor
and hirer and discovered that the creditor may not legally
pursue the hirer of the car as hirer. The hirer then should
communicate this to the creditor at the earliest possible
opportunity. You can't do this online, so write to them.
In effect, the hirer would be setting out their cast-iron
defence to prevent the creditor incurring unnecessary and
irrecoverable costs by continuing to pursue the matter.
The legal position as I see it:
Failure to provide the mandatory docs under para. 14 to Schedule
4;
Failure to state correct practically all the mandatory periods
and conditions applicable under para. 4 as regards having the
right to enforce against the hirer.
*-if Skoda do write, then come back.
**- read para. 4 and see what a NTH should contain:
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4/enacted
#Post#: 22045--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC PCN - No Payment - Lower Precinct Shopping Centre,
Coventry
DIR By: slapdash
Date: May 10, 2024, 6:32 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: H C Andersen link ---
>
> Aren't we off-course.
>
> The creditor is UKPC, not Skoda.
>
--- End Quote ---
Yes, but ....
I did not say VWFS will pay it.
I did say, by policy, VWFS have a habit of paying any second
invoice - irrespective of whether they have any contractual
right to do so (and irrespective of whether they have any actual
obligation).
The result of that is, in effect:-
"You can't do that".
"We just did, your move".
Thus, *if* VWFS do act as they have often done, op needs a
different approach because they then have a contractual dispute
with VWFS instead.
#Post#: 22046--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC PCN - No Payment - Lower Precinct Shopping Centre,
Coventry
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: May 10, 2024, 6:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: slapdash link ---
>
> Thus, *if* VWFS do act as they have often done, op needs a
different approach because they then have a contractual dispute
with VWFS instead.
>
--- End Quote ---
Indeed, but so that this thread does not get unduly sidetracked
by an issue that may not emerge, I suggest we cross that bridge
if we come to it, and for now focus on the OP's dispute with
UKPC.
#Post#: 22047--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC PCN - No Payment - Lower Precinct Shopping Centre,
Coventry
DIR By: b789
Date: May 10, 2024, 6:53 am
---------------------------------------------------------
In their contract, a “parking charge” cannot come
under the heading of “Fines”.
Trying to appeal this with UKPC is an exercise in futility. I
have already told the OP to complain to UKPC, pointing out that
they cannot be liable for the charge as the hirer and that UKPC
have breached their ATA CoP by failing to adhere to the
requirements of PoFA for the reasons stated.
UKPC either cancel the PCN or they are then reported to the BPA
with the details. The BPAs response will then determine the next
steps. The BPA will not do anything until the complaints
procedure with the operator has been exhausted.
Additionally, the OP has received the NtH so liability has been
transferred away from VWFS. UKPC cannot go back to them with
another invoice. Even if they did, the OP would have a rock
solid claim against them if they then went ahead and paid it.
#Post#: 22048--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC PCN - No Payment - Lower Precinct Shopping Centre,
Coventry
DIR By: slapdash
Date: May 10, 2024, 6:56 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I wasn't trying to sidetrack merely alert the possibility of
having to change direction. Fwiw my sons experience was 2 he
ignored VWFS just paid (he got the "policy" letter. 1 he
appealed went to debt collection etc. The likely trigger for the
difference is obvious.
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 8
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page