DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 3131--------------------------------------------------
Re: Private PCN St Michael's Court
DIR By: Chaseman
Date: August 12, 2023, 6:44 am
---------------------------------------------------------
OK I have decided to appeal this one, here's the draft. I fully
expect Parking Eye to reject in which case I will take it to
POPLA:
--- Quote ---
> Dear Sirs,
>
> I received your Notice to Keeper 226902/075498 for vehicle VRM
LF64SFY of which I am the registered keeper. I was not the
driver of the car on the date in question.
>
> You have failed to comply with the requirements of Schedule 4
of The Protection Of Freedoms Act 2012 namely, but not limited
to, failing to specify the location of the relevant land as
required by section 9 (2)(a) of the Act. It is not possible to
determine the location of the alleged breach of your conditions
because you have stated the address as just "St Michaels Court".
A quick check on Google Maps finds at least nine St Michaels
Courts in England including Aylsham, Amersham, two addresses in
London, South Shields, Gloucester, Derby, Litchfield and
Weybridge. You cannot, therefore, transfer liability for the
alleged charge from the driver at the time to me, the keeper.
>
> There is no legal requirement to name the driver at the time
and I will not be doing so. I look forward to receiving your
notice of acceptance. Should you reject this representation I
shall appeal to POPLA. It will not be in order for you to
specify the address more closely in a reply. Only the
information on the PCN is admissible. Please note I am making
this representation within 14 days of issue of the PCN.
--- End Quote ---
I have made up the last bit but hope it's true. I don't think
they can come back and say "sorry, here's the full address with
postcode, you have another 14 days to pay the discounted
amount." But no doubt someone will advise.
#Post#: 3135--------------------------------------------------
Re: Private PCN St Michael's Court
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: August 12, 2023, 7:48 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote ---
> I don't think they can come back and say "sorry, here's the
full address with postcode, you have another 14 days to pay the
discounted amount."
--- End Quote ---
They can come back with whatever they like, but if they want to
engage PoFA to hold the keeper liable, then it's what's on the
Notice to Keeper that counts. For a belt and braces approach,
you could send your appeal so that it arrives too late for them
to issue a compliant notice (so if submitting online, day 13
would do it).
#Post#: 3136--------------------------------------------------
Re: Private PCN St Michael's Court
DIR By: Chaseman
Date: August 12, 2023, 8:24 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Yes, that's really what I was getting at i.e. they can't adduce
new evidence/info and have it included in "the process". I was
intending to file on-line so with the date of issue being 1 Aug
you reckon 14 Aug to file would be safe?
#Post#: 3200--------------------------------------------------
Re: Private PCN St Michael's Court
DIR By: Chaseman
Date: August 14, 2023, 1:44 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I have now submitted the appeal on-line along the lines of the
draft above. The interesting thing is that when I get into the
appeal pages the full address where the offence is alleged to
have occurred is shown. However, this just is not on the face of
the PCN and hence I am arguing (or will argue if necessary) that
this is inadmissible.
#Post#: 3201--------------------------------------------------
Re: Private PCN St Michael's Court
DIR By: Chaseman
Date: August 14, 2023, 2:40 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Automated response from Parking Eye
--- Quote ---
> Thank you for contacting Parkingeye, we acknowledge receipt of
your appeal.
> We endeavour to respond to all appeals as soon as possible.
Whilst we consider an appeal the parking charge amount will not
increase. Please note that a full written response may take up
to 28 days.
> Kind Regards,
> Parkingeye Appeals Team
--- End Quote ---
So they do maintain the discount pending their reply.
#Post#: 3208--------------------------------------------------
Re: Private PCN St Michael's Court
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: August 14, 2023, 4:17 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Chaseman link ---
>
> However, this just is not on the face of the PCN and hence I
am arguing (or will argue if necessary) that this is
inadmissible.
--- End Quote ---
Indeed. To be clear, it's not that the extra information they've
included on the appeal website is 'inadmissible' - if the matter
goes to POPLA/court, they can include whatever information they
so desire. Your argument would be that Schedule 4 of PoFA
clearly states that it is the Notice to Keeper that must specify
the location, if they want to hold the keeper liable, and that
simply stating 'St Michaels Court' does not do this. The fact
that further information is provided on their website is largely
irrelevant. (After all, not all PCN recipients will visit the
website, some will either pay or appeal entirely by post)
--- Quote from: Chaseman link ---
>
> So they do maintain the discount pending their reply.
>
--- End Quote ---
Good to know!
#Post#: 3214--------------------------------------------------
Re: Private PCN St Michael's Court
DIR By: Chaseman
Date: August 14, 2023, 5:58 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Quite understood. The PCN must be standalone under POFA (who on
earth gave it that daft name? Whose freedoms are being
protected?)
A reminder of the original PCN turned up in the post today just
for good measure....
#Post#: 3215--------------------------------------------------
Re: Private PCN St Michael's Court
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: August 14, 2023, 6:12 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Chaseman link ---
>
> (who on earth gave it that daft name? Whose freedoms are being
protected?)
>
--- End Quote ---
Bear in mind that the Protection of Freedoms Act is a large
piece of legislation, and only one of its schedules relates to
parking on private land. Other parts of the act regulate the
storage/destruction of fingerprint records by the police and
others, the regulation of CCTV use, the protection of property
from disproportionate enforcement action, counter-terrorism
powers, protecting vulnerable groups, disregarding convictions
for outdated crimes like buggery etc., and other measures...
In relation to private parking, the Protection of Freedoms Act
also made immobilising vehicles in private car parks an offence.
If the case you are currently challenging had happened prior to
the introduction of PoFA, the driver may have returned to the
car to find a clamp attached, and a private company demanding a
fee before they would release it.
#Post#: 3227--------------------------------------------------
Re: Private PCN St Michael's Court
DIR By: Chaseman
Date: August 14, 2023, 10:54 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Oh well, I suppose that's one advance. I imagine the quid pro
quo to the PPC industry was "you can't clamp anyone but you can
pursue the registered keeper if he refuses to identify the
driver".
#Post#: 3271--------------------------------------------------
Re: Private PCN St Michael's Court
DIR By: The Rookie
Date: August 15, 2023, 5:02 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Chaseman link ---
>
> Yes, that's really what I was getting at i.e. they can't
adduce new evidence/info
>
--- End Quote ---
It's nothing to do with 'evidence'.
To be compliant the Notice to Keeper must specify the location.
Its obvious really, for the keeper to be able to contest they
must know enough about the allegation to have a chance to do so,
if they don't know the location, they can't check the signage
etc.etc. to be able to contest it.
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 9
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page