DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 21566--------------------------------------------------
UKPC Fine for car not being in bay
DIR By: Jag84
Date: May 4, 2024, 2:29 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Received today from UKPC. The photo on the letter does not
really clearly show if it is. It says go to www.paycharge.co.uk
for additional images
When i go to that site just seems to give me options to pay the
fine and not view additional images. Not sure if anyone else has
used site do you have to select pay option to view additional
images ?
My wife is the registered owner of the car and i think if it is
over the bay line it will be marginal but without seeing the
other images can't tell
What should I do ? I have attached image of letter
Thanks for any help or advice
#Post#: 21573--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC Fine for car not being in bay
DIR By: b789
Date: May 4, 2024, 3:58 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Do you mean these photos?
HTML https://i.imgur.com/XKeD0wf.jpeg
HTML https://i.imgur.com/zbGtPqO.jpeg
HTML https://i.imgur.com/pGuw7iU.jpeg
HTML https://i.imgur.com/0YduMy3.jpeg
HTML https://i.imgur.com/fyHQcu0.jpeg
#Post#: 21576--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC Fine for car not being in bay
DIR By: b789
Date: May 4, 2024, 4:21 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
You need to be more careful when posting images of documents
that contain personalised info such as the PCN number and your
car reg. Someone with less scrupulous intentions could easily
get in and mess your chance of appeal.
You need to go to
HTML https://ukpcappeals.co.uk
in order to appeal.
However, have you tried plan A yet? Go to the store or find out
who is the landowner or manager and ask them to get the PCN
cancelled. It really is a de minimis issue and just goes to
prove how much these scammers will try to extort money.
If you've had no luck with Plan A by day 27 of the issue date of
the Notice to Keeper (NtK) then you should do the Plan B appeal
to UKPC. Just in case you are not aware, you are dealing with
cowboys and scammers (Hansard) who really do not care about any
mitigating circumstances. If/when they reject your Plan B
appeal, you then move on to your Plan C POPLA appeal.
If/when they reject that you go through the "limbo" stage where
you just have to weather all the useless debt collector letters
which you can safely ignore. If/when either UKPC themselves or
through their solicitors, DCB Legal, you are issued with a
Letter of Claim you come back for advice. This is the Plan D
kicks in and is a guarantee that they will eventually
discontinue.
A robustly defended claim from UKPC directly or through their
DCB Legal pals, will result in a discontinuation before any
hearing. They are hoping that you are low-hanging fruit on the
gullible tree and will capitulate at the first sign of any
threats and pay up. Hold your nerve and they will will be the
ones that capitulate in the end.
As it is your wife who is the registered keeper, all
correspondence has to be in her name although you can do it all
for her. The NtK is basically PoFA compliant (except for a
technical failure which they are likely to ignore) so the keeper
can be liable for the charge if the driver is not identified. In
all cases it is the driver who is liable and transferring
liability to the driver if your wife was not the person who
parked does not really matter.
Any appeal for Plan B and Plan C must show that it was
impossible to park within the bay and have space for a passenger
to enter/exit the vehicle due to the poor management of the
parking spaces by the operator as is evidenced by their own
photos. In fact, the vehicle is not parked outside of the bay as
the cars wheels are on the line itself. Therefore no breach of
terms has taken place and there was no reasonable cause for the
operator to request the keepers details from the DVLA in breach
of the KADOE rules and the keepers GDPR.
Additionally, the UKPC signs breach their own ATA, the BPA, Code
of Practice in that they are illegible unless you are within 6
inches and your head is at least 7 feet above ground level.
For now, concentrate on Plan A.
Follow the advice you get here and you will not be paying a
penny to into the UKPC scam.
#Post#: 21578--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC Fine for car not being in bay
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: May 4, 2024, 5:17 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I've removed the copy of the PCN. As well as the details b789
mentions you also left your full name showing.
#Post#: 21580--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC Fine for car not being in bay
DIR By: Jag84
Date: May 4, 2024, 6:32 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you very much I will proceed with plan A. Apologies I
thought i had scrubbed out my address, pcn and wifes name but
maybe i uploaded the unedited image by mistake.
Should Plan A not work any advice what I should put in the
appeal for plan B or should I worry about that later ?
#Post#: 21582--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC Fine for car not being in bay
DIR By: b789
Date: May 4, 2024, 6:46 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
It may depend on whether your wife, the registered keeper, was
also the deriver. As the NtK is, technically, not PoFA compliant
due to the absence of 9(2)(e)(i), although I'm not 100% sure now
that it has been removed, only the driver can be liable for the
charge. They have no idea who the driver is and if they cannot
rely on PoFA, either at POPLA or at court, then by not
identifying the driver there is a better chance of a winning
point.
Whilst it is highly unlikely that UKPC will accept any argument
that the PCN was not issued correctly, the more important appeal
will be to POPLA. Mitigation is not considered, only points of
law and breaches of the BPA CoP. UKPC signage is always bad and
can be a winning point. Their signs are difficult to read which
is a breach of the CoP.
If the wheel is not actually outside of the bay, as shown in the
photos, it is still on the line, then it cannot be out of the
bay. However, there was no way that the vehicle could park fully
within the bay due to the restrictive size of it and the
proximity of the vehicle next to it. If UKPC were "managing" the
car park, rather than trying to extort money from motorists for
a de minimis alleged breach, the bays would be properly marked
and of a size that permitted actual use.
As mentioned earlier though, whether the appellant is successful
or not at POPLA, these single PCNs, if defended robustly, are
eventually discontinued before they get to a hearing.
#Post#: 21588--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC Fine for car not being in bay
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: May 5, 2024, 4:10 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The fact it's an end bay works in your favour here. If there was
another bay to the driver's side, there would be a fair argument
to be made that they were obstructing the other bay, justifying
a charge.
Here though there's no other bay being blocked, nor does the
parking obstruct road access etc., seems very much de minimis.
#Post#: 21720--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC Fine for car not being in bay
DIR By: Jag84
Date: May 6, 2024, 7:44 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I went to the B&M store and the manager said he can't do
anything about it he said they always will fine you even on
minor thing. So I've emailed B&M customer service and see
whether they will be more helpful.
Just a few questions
- it's not advisable then to just stay silent on all the
requests banking it's not going to go to court ? Someone said to
me if you respond they will really pursue you
- Yesterday when I went i noticed the base of UKPC sign post
was surrounded by B&M compost sacks preventing you from getting
a close read of it. Can that be raised as an issue. Attached
photo of it
- I had to take photo of the sign from different section of car
park. However I noticed it said car has to be parked within the
bay. From the previous photos you can see my car was on the line
and not inside. Can I still in my appeal make the case no
contravention has occurred as car is on the line ?
- whilst i was there two other cars had come and gone and parked
in same spot and both parked same way. I took photos and
mentioned this in my email to B&M showing this appears to be a
common problem experienced by other customers as well
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 21722--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC Fine for car not being in bay
DIR By: b789
Date: May 7, 2024, 12:08 am
---------------------------------------------------------
You’re overthinking this. The photos are good for your appeal to
POPLA once UKPC reject the initial appeal. UKPC signs are
terrible and have been a reason for successful POPLA appeals.
The terms are illegible unless you are right up close and the
charge of £100 is lost in the mass of wording thereby failing to
bring it to the attention of the driver.
Even if the POPLA appeal was unsuccessful, you won’t be paying a
penny to UKPC. POPLA decisions are not binding on the appellant
and have absolutely no bearing on any court claim.
They will either issue a claim themselves or use DCB Legal to do
so. They rely on their victims being low-hanging fruit on the
gullible tree and capitulating and paying up once the pressure
is on. If you follow the advice and hold your nerve, they will,
eventually, discontinue and that will be the end of it.
They never continue with a well defended claim, especially for a
single PCN. They know that they are likely to lose if a judge
becomes involved.
#Post#: 22976--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC Fine for car not being in bay
DIR By: Jag84
Date: May 18, 2024, 8:58 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I've gone around the houses with B&M and they say its out of
their control they can't cancel the ticket have to contact UKPC
So as advised I'm going to put in an appeal and was planning to
submit the below. Is that OK ?
"After reviewing the photos provided, I respectfully disagree
with the assessment that my vehicle was parked outside of the
bay. The photos show that my vehicle was positioned on the line,
not beyond it. Additionally, as demonstrated in the photos, the
neighboring car was parked in a similar manner. This situation
necessitated that my vehicle be parked as far to the right as
possible to maintain a safe distance between vehicles.
Furthermore, the parking bays provided are not sufficiently wide
for safe parking, as clearly illustrated in the photos. The
inadequate width of the bays makes it challenging to park
without encroaching on the lines, and the bay lines themselves
are fading due to poor maintenance. This lack of clear
demarcation contributes significantly to the difficulty in
parking properly.
Moreover, the signage in the car park is poor and faded. While
you have provided a photo of a sign, it does not show the
nearest one in the section where the vehicle was parked. I have
included a photo showing that the nearest sign is surrounded by
goods from the B&M store, which restricts access and visibility.
Based on the inadequate space for safe parking, the poor
maintenance of the car park, and the inadequate signage, I
believe the penalty charge should be cancelled."
In the appeal do I need to reveal who the driver was in field
"Relationship to Vehicle"?
Gives me 3 options "Driver", "Registered Keeper", "Driver &
Registered Keeper"
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 4
DIR Next Page