URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
  HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 28496--------------------------------------------------
       Winscreen ticket - Sainsburys Merton, with a twist
   DIR By: Sarf London
       Date: July 3, 2024, 12:09 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hi all. Some advice would be appreciated.
       The driver returned to their vehicle to find a PCN attached to
       the windscreen. There's a twist. The PCN is missing the first 1"
       of printing all the way down due to a misaligned printing
       machine. The Make, Time observed, Reg No, PCN No, and date by
       which the discounted rate can be claimed are all missing or cut
       off. So has the driver really recived a PCN (as per POFA) or
       just some random piece of paper ?
       Should this be appealed as the keeper on Day 25 or do you
       suggest a different course of action ?
       And what should the appeal be ? The White Tesla is parked
       exactly where the driver was parked on the previous day when the
       ticket was issued.
       Many thanks
  HTML https://i.postimg.cc/WFdS4mvY/ECP.jpg
  HTML https://postimg.cc/WFdS4mvY
  HTML https://i.postimg.cc/MMg5fcZ6/Tesla-in-space.jpg
  HTML https://postimg.cc/MMg5fcZ6
       #Post#: 28539--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Winscreen ticket - Sainsburys Merton, with a twist
   DIR By: b789
       Date: July 3, 2024, 3:39 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       For a EURO CAR PARKS (ECP) Parking Charge Notice (PCN) issued on
       private land to be valid, it needs to comply with specific
       requirements set out by the British Parking Association (BPA) in
       their Code of Practice (CoP). If a Notice to Driver (NtD) has
       crucial details misprinted or missing, such as dates or other
       essential information, this affects the validity of the PCN.
       Key points to consider include:
       1. Accuracy of Information: The NtD must include specific
       information, such as the date and time of the alleged
       contravention, the reason for the charge, and the amount due. If
       these details are cut off or misprinted, it renders the PCN
       invalid because it does not provide the necessary information
       for the unknown driver to understand and respond to the charge.
       2. Code of Practice Compliance: ECP must adhere to the CoP set
       by the BPA. This code requires that NtDs contain clear and
       correct information. Non-compliance with the code is grounds for
       the PCN to be cancelled.
       3. Right to Appeal: As the recipient of a misprinted or
       incomplete NtD you should appeal the PCN as the known keeper. Do
       not identify the unknown driver. In the appeal, you should cite
       the inaccuracies or missing information as part of your grounds
       for challenging the validity of the PCN.
       4. Keeper Liability: Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012
       (PoFA), for an unregulated private parking company (PPC) such as
       ECP to hold the vehicle keeper liable, they must follow strict
       guidelines, including correctly issuing the NtD and any
       subsequent Notice to Keeper (NtK). Any errors in the NtD impact
       the PPCs ability to enforce the charge against the known keeper.
       As you have received a PCN with misprinted or missing
       information, you should note the following:
       Strategic timing is crucial when dealing with PCNs issued as
       NtDs on private land in England. Here’s a detailed explanation
       of the approach which involves delaying the appeal:
       1. Understand PoFA: The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA)
       sets out the rules for holding the (known) registered keeper of
       a vehicle liable for parking charges incurred by the unknown
       driver. For the ECP to rely on PoFA, they must follow specific
       procedures and timeframes.
       2. NtD and NtK Timeframes: When a Notice to Driver (NtD) is
       issued, ECP must wait at least 28 days before sending an NtK.
       However, the NtK must be sent within 56 days of the alleged
       contravention.
       3. Strategic Delay in Appealing: By waiting to appeal the NtD
       (only as the keeper) until close to the 28-day mark (around day
       26), you can potentially exploit a timing gap:
       - Delayed Process: ECP might not process and respond to your
       appeal before the 28-day window closes.
       - NtK Issuance Delay: If ECP does not issue the NtK within the
       required timeframe (56 days) or not at all, they lose the right
       to hold the known keeper instead of the unknown driver liable
       under PoFA.
       4. Challenging the NtD: As the NtD has misprinted or missing
       crucial information, this will form the basis of your appeal.
       Ensure you document these issues clearly in your appeal.
       5. Potential Outcomes:
       - Appeal Accepted: If the appeal is accepted, the PCN is
       cancelled.
       - Appeal Rejected: If the appeal is rejected and ECP has not
       yet sent the NtK, they may miss the PoFA deadlines, preventing
       them from holding the known keeper liable.
       6. Follow-Up: If ECP fails to send the NtK within 56 days, they
       cannot use PoFA to enforce the charge against the known keeper.
       You can then respond to any further correspondence by
       highlighting their non-compliance with PoFA.
       Steps to Take:
       1. Photograph and Document: Take clear photographs of the NtD
       showing the misprinted or missing information. DONE
       2. Prepare Appeal: Draft your appeal, focusing on the errors in
       the NtD and your understanding of the timing strategy. **Show us
       before you send anything.
       3. Submit Appeal: Submit the appeal around day 26 after the NtD
       was issued.
       4. Monitor for NtK: Keep an eye out for any NtK being issued. If
       the PPC misses the 56-day deadline, they cannot hold the known
       keeper liable.
       Considerations:
       - Parking Company Practices: Some parking companies may be more
       diligent in adhering to PoFA timelines, so this strategy may not
       always succeed.
       By following this strategic approach, you increase the
       likelihood of avoiding keeper liability under PoFA, especially
       when the NtD itself is flawed.
       For clarification, only the unknown driver is liable for any
       debt for an alleged breach of contract with the PPC. The PPC
       does not know the identity of the unknown driver unless the
       known keeper divulges it, unintentionally or otherwise. There is
       no legal obligation for the known keeper to identify the unknown
       driver.
       #Post#: 28821--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Winscreen ticket - Sainsburys Merton, with a twist
   DIR By: Sarf London
       Date: July 6, 2024, 8:12 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Getting my appeal ready ahead of the deadline. Please feedback.
       One point to note is that the ECP website makes it impossible to
       appeal online without a PCN Number which of course I don't have,
       so I am going to be forced to send this by mail, 1st class,
       proof of posting.
       Re PCN number: UNKNOWN
       I am the keeper of vehicle <REGISTRATION NUMBER> and my address
       is <ADDRESS>
       On the 2nd July a ‘ING CHARGE NOTICE’ was placed on the vehicle
       in Sainsbury’s Merton and has since been handed to me.
       I am appealing as the KEEPER of the vehicle.
       The piece of paper handed to me purports to be a parking charge
       notice except that due to misalignment of the printing machine,
       all of the relevant information has been curtailed.
       Under Paragraph 7 of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms
       Act 2012, certain information MUST be present for a Notice to
       Driver to be valid and this information is missing from this
       ‘ING CHARGE NOTICE’ namely but not limited to:
       -the vehicle;
       -the relevant land;
       the parking period;
       -the parking charge;
       -dates by which a ‘discount’ may be obtained;
       Your ‘ING CHARGE NOTICE’ therefore cannot be relied upon as a
       valid Notice to Driver under paragraph 7(1)(a) of Schedule 4 of
       the Protection of Freedoms Act.
       As such, you have also failed in this instance to abide by the
       BPA Code of Practice paragraphs 21.6 and 21.7. In addition, your
       website does not provide an opportunity to appeal without a ‘PCN
       Number’ which I am unable to provide in this instance and so you
       have failed to comply with section 23 of the same BPA Code. A
       complaint to the BPA will be made forthwith.
       I dispute your 'parking charge', as the keeper of the vehicle.
       There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no
       assumptions can be drawn.
       I expect to receive confirmation that this ‘ING PARKING CHARGE’
       has been withdrawn.
       #Post#: 28843--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Winscreen ticket - Sainsburys Merton, with a twist
   DIR By: b789
       Date: July 6, 2024, 11:28 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       You don't have to send by post. You can use their "contact us"
       portal here:
  HTML https://www.eurocarparks.com/enquiry/
       and you can
       upload your complaint as a PDF file. Just add the message that
       they should treat the message as both a complaint and an appeal.
       Do not file the appeal/complaint until day 26 after it was
       received. Just covering all the options in case they are too
       stupid to cancel it immediately and they fail to send an NtK by
       day 56.
       You could as whether it is a "Park" or a "Feck" ing charge
       notice.  ;)
       #Post#: 29092--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Winscreen ticket - Sainsburys Merton, with a twist
   DIR By: Sarf London
       Date: July 8, 2024, 7:30 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Thanks for your help !
       Was toying with ****ing charge notice !
       Day 26 in the diary..... Will let you know how I get on.
       #Post#: 31528--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Winscreen ticket - Sainsburys Merton, with a twist
   DIR By: Sarf London
       Date: July 29, 2024, 7:08 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       So I submitted the appeal as keeper as described above on Day
       26. They came back almost immediately with the following :
       VRM – xxxxxx
       PCN – xxxxxxxxxxx
       Please be advised that it is the registered keeper’s
       responsibility to inform of the full name and UK serviceable
       address of who was driving the vehicle within 28 days beginning
       with the day after the notice was given. If the full amount
       remains unpaid, under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms
       Act 2012 (‘the Act’), Euro Car Parks have the right subject of
       the Act to recover from the keeper of the vehicle at the time it
       was parked so much of that amount which remains unpaid.
       If you wish to appeal, please complete the online appeals form
       at
  HTML https://appeals.eurocarparks.com/Appeals/Default.aspx
       and
       ensure you upload any supporting documents.
       --------------------------------------------------------
       Putting aside the complete **** which is the first sentence (and
       the fact that I appealed/complained as keeper), I guess I now
       just sit here for another 28 days and see if an NtK arrives ?
       #Post#: 31549--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Winscreen ticket - Sainsburys Merton, with a twist
   DIR By: b789
       Date: July 29, 2024, 9:15 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I wouldn’t worry about it. They cannot hold the keeper liable as
       their NtD did not comply with PoFA. Their NtD also failed to
       comply with the BPA CoP.
       Wait until they send an appeal rejection with a POPLA code and
       show POPLA how they have failed to do play with both PoFA and
       the CoP.
       In fact, simply respond to that email with:
       --- Quote ---
       > As the keeper of vehicle [VRM] in response to your “ING CHARGE
       NOTICE”, I decline to identify the driver. As your “ING CHARGE
       NOTICE” does not comply with the requirements of PoFA, you are
       unable to hold me liable as the keeper.
       >
       > Either cancel the PCN or issue a POPLA code where an assessor
       can review your PoFA and your BPA Code of Practice failings.
       --- End Quote ---
       #Post#: 31613--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Winscreen ticket - Sainsburys Merton, with a twist
   DIR By: Sarf London
       Date: July 30, 2024, 7:13 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       The stupidity of these people...... came straight back with the
       same response.
       #Post#: 33347--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Winscreen ticket - Sainsburys Merton, with a twist
   DIR By: Sarf London
       Date: August 14, 2024, 7:48 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       SO no real appeal or complaint response, just the boilerplate I
       described above, and no POPLA code either.
       Instead I have just received an NtK which I assume I appeal on
       Day 26 as keeper.....
  HTML https://i.postimg.cc/YGdmjxsX/NTK-Back.jpg
  HTML https://postimg.cc/YGdmjxsX
  HTML https://i.postimg.cc/47f9J0B7/NTK-Front.jpg
  HTML https://postimg.cc/47f9J0B7
       #Post#: 33351--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Winscreen ticket - Sainsburys Merton, with a twist
   DIR By: b789
       Date: August 14, 2024, 8:30 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       There's no point in delaying the appeal to the NtK. It has been
       issued within the required timeline. However, there is a notable
       failure in the wording of the NtK that renders it non-compliant
       with PoFA. Here is a précis of why it is not compliant:
       --- Quote ---
       > Schedule 4, Paragraph 8(2)(e)(i) of PoFA 2012
       >
       > This paragraph mandates that for a parking operator to hold
       the vehicle's registered keeper liable for a parking charge, the
       Notice to Keeper (NtK) must include:
       >
       > An "Invitation to Pay": The notice must explicitly invite the
       keeper to pay the unpaid parking charges.
       >
       > Exact Wording: The wording must clearly convey this invitation
       and mere implication or indirect suggestions are insufficient.
       The act requires strict compliance, meaning that any failure to
       fully incorporate this invitation renders the notice
       non-compliant with the requirements of PoFA 2012.
       >
       > Non-Compliance Issue
       >
       > If the NtK fails to include a clear "invitation to pay", or
       any synonym of the word "invitation", this omission is a breach
       of Schedule 4, Paragraph 8(2)(e)(i). Even if the notice suggests
       that payment is required, without an explicit invitation
       directed towards the keeper to settle the charge, the notice
       does not meet the exacting requirements of PoFA 2012.
       >
       > Significance of Full Compliance
       >
       > Strict Liability: The law mandates full and exact compliance
       with the specified wording and content outlined in PoFA 2012.
       >
       > Partial or Substantial Compliance Insufficient: Even if the
       notice largely complies with other requirements, the absence of
       a clear invitation to the keeper to pay is a significant flaw.
       The operator cannot rely on partial or even substantial
       compliance — every element as specified in the legislation must
       be present and correct.
       >
       > Consequences for the Operator
       >
       > Challenge Basis: If the notice is found to lack this crucial
       element, it can be used as a basis to challenge the parking
       charge.
       >
       > Keeper Liability: The operator cannot transfer liability to
       the keeper, which significantly weaken their case if the notice
       to the driver or other requirements are also flawed or if the
       driver is unknown.
       >
       > Conclusion
       >
       > In summary, a PCN that does not include an explicit
       "invitation" for the keeper to pay the charge is not fully
       compliant with Schedule 4, Paragraph 8(2)(e)(i) of PoFA 2012.
       Since the law demands strict adherence, any omission, even if
       minor, invalidates the notice and relieves the keeper of any
       obligation to pay. This should be raised in any appeal or legal
       response to the charge.
       --- End Quote ---
       ECP will reject any appeal but they then have to provide a POPLA
       code. So, the initial appeal to ECP only needs to be short and
       to the point:
       --- Quote ---
       > I dispute your 'parking charge', as the keeper of the vehicle.
       I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be
       making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client
       landowner.
       >
       > As your Notice to Keeper (NtK) does not fully comply with ALL
       the requirements of PoFA 2012, namely no "invitation", or any
       synonym of the word, for the keeper to pay the charge as per
       paragraph 8(2)(e)(i), you are unable to hold the keeper of the
       vehicle liable for the charge. Partial or even substantial
       compliance is not sufficient. There will be no admission as to
       who was driving and no inference or assumptions can be drawn.
       >
       > Since your PCN is a vague template, I require an explanation
       of the allegations and your evidence. You must include a close
       up actual photograph of the sign you contend was at the location
       on the material date as well as your images of the vehicle.
       >
       > I suggest you cancel the PCN or issue me with a POPLA code.
       --- End Quote ---
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 3
   DIR Next Page