DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 44262--------------------------------------------------
Re: Used Millwall Dock for a photo shoot, Group Nexus, but was I
parked?
DIR By: docklander
Date: November 6, 2024, 12:00 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I sent the letter with the suggested text and have had no reply.
Today I received a letter dated 31/10/2024 saying that as they
have had no payment, I now need to pay £100. If I do not pay
within 14 days, they "may" ask a debt recovery agent, etc.
Whats the next step please gang?
#Post#: 44263--------------------------------------------------
Re: Used Millwall Dock for a photo shoot, Group Nexus, but was I
parked?
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: November 6, 2024, 12:13 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
When did you send the appeal?
#Post#: 44270--------------------------------------------------
Re: Used Millwall Dock for a photo shoot, Group Nexus, but was I
parked?
DIR By: docklander
Date: November 6, 2024, 12:31 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
It would have been around 26 or 27 October
#Post#: 44324--------------------------------------------------
Re: Used Millwall Dock for a photo shoot, Group Nexus, but was I
parked?
DIR By: b789
Date: November 7, 2024, 3:35 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: docklander link ---
>
> It would have been around 26 or 27 October
>
--- End Quote ---
Was it 26th or 27th October. Your "Proof of Posting" certificate
will tell you.
They have 28 days to respond to your appeal. According to you,
it's only been about 11 or 12 days!
Don't get your hopes up anyway. You have more chance of winning
the lottery than an initial appealing upheld.
#Post#: 48664--------------------------------------------------
Re: Used Millwall Dock for a photo shoot, Group Nexus, but was I
parked?
DIR By: docklander
Date: December 6, 2024, 11:57 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I have had a reply from Group Nexus. Thoughts on next step?
Dated 27.11, received 06.12
Thank you for your correspondence elating to your Parking
Charge. The Charge was issued and the signage is displayed in
compliance with The British Parking Association's Approved
Operator Scheme Code of Practice and all relevant laws and
regulations. Clear signs at the entrance of this site and
throughout inform drivers of the terms and conditions that apply
there, and it is not possible to access any part of the premises
without passing multiple signs. Your representations are not
considered a mitigating circumstance for appeal. We confirm the
Charge was issued under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms
Act 2012. As no driver details have been provided, we are
holding the registered keeper of the vehicle liable. In light of
this, n this occasion, your representations have been carefully
considered and rejected. We can confirm that We will hold the
charge at the current rate for a further 14 days from the date
of this correspondence.
You have now reached the end of our internal appeals procedure.
Although we have now rejected your appeal, you may still have
recourse to appeal to Parking On Private Land Appeals (POPLA),
an independent appeals service. An appeal to POPLA must be made
within 28 days of the date of this letter. POPLA will only
consider cases on the grounds that the Parking Charge exceeded
the appropriate amount, that the not improperly parked or had
been stolen, or that you were otherwise not liable for the
Parking Charge. vehicle was To appeal to POPLA, please go to
their website
HTML http://www.popla.co.uk
and follow the
instructions. If you would rather deal with this matter by post,
please contact our Appeals Office and we will send you the
necessary paperwork. Your POPLA reference number is: XXX P
lease note that if your appeal does not relate to the above
criteria or is rejected by POPLA for any reason, you will no
longer qualify for payment at the reduced rate. POPLA will not
consider any cases where payment has been made.
By law we are also required to inform you that Ombudsman
Services (www.ombudsman-services.org/) provides an alternative
dispute resolution service that would be competent to deal with
your appeal. However, we have not chosen to participate in their
alternative dispute resolution service. As such should you wish
to appeal then you must do so to POPLA, as explained above.
Yours sincerely
CP Plus Limited GNI
#Post#: 48728--------------------------------------------------
Re: Used Millwall Dock for a photo shoot, Group Nexus, but was I
parked?
DIR By: b789
Date: December 7, 2024, 5:07 am
---------------------------------------------------------
You have 33 days from the appeal rejection date to submit an
appeal to POPLA. Your POPLA appeal, only as the Keeper, should
include the fact that the NtK is not fully compliant with ALL
the requirements of PoFA.
Paragraph 9(2)(e) of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms
Act 2012 (PoFA) states that the NtK must specify the name of the
creditor who is entitled to recover the parking charge. This is
a strict requirement, and failure to comply renders the NtK
invalid under PoFA for keeper liability purposes.
The notice states that "payment of the charge amount is required
when parked on our client’s property". However, it does not
explicitly identify who the "creditor" is. Simply stating "our
client" or referring to the parking company itself is not
sufficient. PoFA requires the explicit naming of the creditor so
the recipient knows exactly who is owed the alleged debt.
If the NtK does not clearly identify the creditor, it fails to
meet the requirement under Paragraph 9(2)(e). This omission
makes the NtK non-compliant with PoFA, meaning the parking
company cannot hold the registered keeper liable for the charge.
Also, under Paragraph 9(2)(e)(i) and Paragraph 9(2)(f) of
Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA), the
Notice to Keeper (NtK) must include a specific invitation to the
keeper to pay the charge. This requirement serves to ensure that
the keeper understands their liability and has a clear course of
action.
They cannot simply rely on the fact that the Parking Charge
Notice (PCN) is addressed to the Keeper to satisfy Paragraph
9(2)(e)(i) of Schedule 4 of PoFA. The law explicitly requires a
clear and specific invitation for the keeper to either:
[indent]• Pay the parking charge, or
• Provide the name and address of the driver (if the keeper was
not the driver).[/indent]
This is not an "implied" requirement; it must be explicitly
stated. Merely inferring that the keeper is invited to pay
because the notice is addressed to them does not meet the strict
wording requirements of PoFA.
PoFA compliance requires specific wording. The law’s intention
is to make the responsibilities of the Keeper clear and
unambiguous. Phrases like "you are invited to pay this parking
charge" or "you are required to do X, Y, Z" are examples of
wording that PoFA expects.
If the notice only says, for example, "the charge must be paid"
or "payment is required" without directly inviting the keeper to
pay, this is insufficient under PoFA. The wording must link the
keeper directly to the payment obligation in an unambiguous way.
The parking company cannot claim keeper liability under PoFA if
they fail to meet the explicit requirements of 9(2)(e)(i). This
is a valid appeal (and defence) point, as courts and independent
adjudicators should not rely on implied obligations instead of
explicit compliance with statutory requirements.
You should also put the operator to strict proof that they have
a valid contract flowing from the landowner that permits them to
issue PCNs at the location. A statement that they hold a
contract is not sufficient and you need evidence of a valid
contract.
Why did the driver not realise that they had to purchase a
permit to stay at the location? Was the signage sufficiently
prominent and legible or not? That is also a valid appeal point.
Have a read of the new Single Code of Practice (SCoP) and v9 of
the BPA Code of Practice (CoP) about signs and how they must be
set out.
Put together something that you think you would like to send and
we will review and make any constructive criticism as necessary.
#Post#: 48762--------------------------------------------------
Re: Used Millwall Dock for a photo shoot, Group Nexus, but was I
parked?
DIR By: docklander
Date: December 7, 2024, 8:12 am
---------------------------------------------------------
So this is my 1st draft appeal:
I am writing to appeal correspondence received from GroupNexus,
reference XXX.
Paragraph 9(2)(e) of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms
Act 2012 (PoFA) states that the Notice to Keeper (NtK) must
specify the name of the creditor who is entitled to recover the
parking charge. This is a strict requirement, and failure to
comply renders the NtK invalid under PoFA for keeper liability
purposes.
The notice states that "payment of the charge amount is required
when parked on our client’s property". However, it does not
explicitly identify who the "creditor" is. Simply stating "our
client" or referring to the parking company itself is not
sufficient. PoFA requires the explicit naming of the creditor so
the recipient knows exactly who is owed the alleged debt.
If the NtK does not clearly identify the creditor, it fails to
meet the requirement under Paragraph 9(2)(e). This omission
makes the NtK non-compliant with PoFA, meaning the parking
company cannot hold the registered keeper liable for the charge.
Also, under Paragraph 9(2)(e)(i) and Paragraph 9(2)(f) of
Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA), the
Notice to Keeper (NtK) must include a specific invitation to the
keeper to pay the charge. This requirement serves to ensure that
the keeper understands their liability and has a clear course of
action.
They cannot simply rely on the fact that the Parking Charge
Notice (PCN) is addressed to the Keeper to satisfy Paragraph
9(2)(e)(i) of Schedule 4 of PoFA. The law explicitly requires a
clear and specific invitation for the keeper to either:
• Pay the parking charge, or
• Provide the name and address of the driver (if the keeper was
not the driver).
This is not an "implied" requirement; it must be explicitly
stated. Merely inferring that the keeper is invited to pay
because the notice is addressed to them does not meet the strict
wording requirements of PoFA.
PoFA compliance requires specific wording. The law’s intention
is to make the responsibilities of the Keeper clear and
unambiguous. Phrases like "you are invited to pay this parking
charge" or "you are required to do X, Y, Z" are examples of
wording that PoFA expects.
If the notice only says, for example, "the charge must be paid"
or "payment is required" without directly inviting the keeper to
pay, this is insufficient under PoFA. The wording must link the
keeper directly to the payment obligation in an unambiguous way.
The parking company cannot claim keeper liability under PoFA if
they fail to meet the explicit requirements of 9(2)(e)(i). This
is a valid appeal (and defence) point, as courts and independent
adjudicators should not rely on implied obligations instead of
explicit compliance with statutory requirements.
GroupNexus has failed to show a valid contract flowing from the
landowner that permits them to issue PCNs at this location.
With the above in mind, I respectfully request you uphold my
appeal and void this matter.
#Post#: 49393--------------------------------------------------
Re: Used Millwall Dock for a photo shoot, Group Nexus, but was I
parked?
DIR By: docklander
Date: December 11, 2024, 12:39 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Any advice on the above post would be much appreciated...
#Post#: 49496--------------------------------------------------
Re: Used Millwall Dock for a photo shoot, Group Nexus, but was I
parked?
DIR By: b789
Date: December 12, 2024, 6:31 am
---------------------------------------------------------
What you have shown is good but you need to remember that you
are trying to lead the POPLA assessor by the nose through each
point. What you have shown covers the PoFA failures which means
that they cannot hold you liable as the Keeper.
You should always add as many points to a POPLA appeal as you
only need to win on a single point and the operator has to rebut
each of your points. You should also include other points about
the signage and the operators contract with the landowner. With
a Group Nexus PCN, always include the landowner contract
validity.
Search for other POPLA appeals on here to get a flavour of what
you need to add to what you already have.
#Post#: 52779--------------------------------------------------
Re: Used Millwall Dock for a photo shoot, Group Nexus, but was I
parked?
DIR By: docklander
Date: January 10, 2025, 5:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I have heard from POPLA that my appeal should be heard within 6
to 8 weeks from today. I will update you in due course.
*****************************************************
Page 3 of 5
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page