DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 53420--------------------------------------------------
Parkmaven NtK and unsuccessful appeal
By: kgw Date: January 15, 2025, 4:17 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hello and happy new year to all,
I've received an NtK dated 24 Dec 2024 (see below) for failing
to notice signs and pay at an ASDA. The driver was willing to
pay the "discounted" £60 but, since the 14 days had just
elapsed, I opted to appeal.
Compared to other NtKs seen on this forum, Parkmaven have added
a PoFA paragraph on page 2 probably to address shortcomings of
their previous NtKs.I was advised on another thread
parkmaven-pcn-st-nicholas-tolentino-bristol-received-3-months-la
ter
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/parkmaven-pcn-st-nicholas-tolentino-bristol-received-3-months-later/msg47571/#msg47571<br
/>that this additional paragraph did not change the fact that
Parkmaven's NtKs are not fully PoFA compliant.
So I sent out on 13 Jan what seems to be the typical appeal:
"As your Notice to Keeper (NtK) does not fully comply with ALL
the requirements of PoFA 2012, 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. Smart Parking has relied on contract law
allegations of breach against the driver only.The registered
keeper cannot be presumed or inferred to have been the driver,
nor pursued under some twisted interpretation of the law of
agency. Your NtK can only hold the driver liable. Smart Parking
have no hope at POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a
complete waste of time and cancel the PCN."
Parkmaven acknowledged and I have received their reply this
morning. It seems to be a standard rejection letter which
ignores the grounds I have laid out:
"Dear Mr xxxx,
Re: Parking Charge Notice Number 2xxxxx (Vehicle: xxxxx)
Site: The Centre Feltham Surface
Issue date: 24/12/2024
POPLA Code: 57xxxxxxxx
Total amount due: (£60.00 until 29/01/2025)
(£100.00 until 12/02/2025)
Thank you for your appeal against the above Parking Charge
Notice (PCN). We have carefully considered your
appeal; however, on this occasion, the appeal has been declined.
As you have failed to provide details of who was driving vehicle
xxxxx at the time of the contravention, we will continue to
pursue you for the outstanding parking charge as per Schedule 4
of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Please note that PoFA is
applicable in England and Wales so if the keeper refuses to name
the driver, we reserve the right to request payment from the
keeper of the vehicle.
As per section 23.12 of The BPA Code of Practice, the only
information that is required of us when rejecting an appeal is
to give clear direction on how to appeal to POPLA and to allow a
reasonable amount of time for the motorist to pay.
Failure to notice parking signs clearly displayed both at the
entrance and throughout the car park does not
authorise your vehicle to park.
As per the signage which is clearly displayed throughout the car
park: By parking within the car park, you are
agreeing to abide by the terms and conditions of the Parking
Contract. Failing to pay, or otherwise validate your vehicle for
the full duration of your stay is therefore failing to comply
with the Parking Contract, and as such means you accept
liability to pay the fee for unauthorised parking.
You have now reached the end of our internal appeals procedure
and therefore you now have two options; you can
either pay or appeal to POPLA - you cannot do both.
You can pay the total amount due as shown above via the
following website:
HTML https://parkmaven.ec6pay.com
Or, you can appeal to an Independent Appeals Service, POPLA
(Parking on Private Land Appeals) using the POPLA Reference code
provided above.
Please note, should you decide to appeal to POPLA and your
appeal is subsequently rejected, or you decide to
withdraw your appeal, the option to pay a discounted amount will
no longer be available and the full amount of the Parking Charge
Notice (PCN) will become due.
If you decide to appeal to POPLA, you will need to visit their
website, where further details of how to appeal (either online
or by downloading the relevant forms) can be found. If you are
unable to access their website, please call us for further
information on how to obtain the forms. Please ensure that your
POPLA reference number as noted above is quoted on all
correspondence to POPLA.
POPLA WEBSITE:
www.popla.co.uk
You have 28 days from the date of this letter to submit an
appeal to POPLA; if you appeal to POPLA we will
suspend recovery activity on the PCN and the charge will not
increase past the full amount until the appeal
has been determined.
By law we are also required to inform you that Ombudsman
Services 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.
OMBUDSMAN WEBSITE:
www.ombudsman-services.org
If you do not make payment or submit an appeal to POPLA within
the relevant timeframe, the outstanding PCN
may be passed to our appointed debt collection agency for
further action. All costs associated with this process will
be added to the outstanding amount.
Yours sincerely,
Appeals Department
ParkMaven Ltd"
Did I make a mistake ?
What can I do at this stage ?
[attach=1][attach=2]
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 53461--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parkmaven NtK and unsuccessful appeal
By: b789 Date: January 15, 2025, 8:11 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Did you make a mistake? I sincerely hope you edited that appeal
to reflect that it was ParkMaven and not Smart parking you were
referring to:
[quote]Smart Parking has relied on contract law allegations of
breach against the driver only.The registered keeper cannot be
presumed or inferred to have been the driver, nor pursued under
some twisted interpretation of the law of agency. Your NtK can
only hold the driver liable. Smart Parking have no hope at
POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of time
and cancel the PCN."[/quote]
Not to worry. You now have a POPLA code which is valid for 33
days from the date of the appeal rejection. You will appeal
based on another ParkMaven appeal I put together earlier today.
The Notice to Keeper (NtK) issued by ParkMaven is non-compliant
with the requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of
Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) due to a contradiction in the payment
deadline specified on the notice.
The front of the NtK prominently states: “Payment to be made
within 28 days of the date issued”. This instruction contradicts
the statutory requirement under PoFA Schedule 4, Paragraph
9(2)(f), which mandates that the keeper be informed that they
have 28 days from the day after the notice is deemed to be given
(served) to either pay the charge or provide the driver's
details.
According to PoFA Schedule 4, Paragraph 9(6), a Notice to Keeper
is deemed to be served two working days after posting, meaning
the 28-day period must start after this deemed service date. The
instruction on the front of the NtK, however, misleadingly
demands payment within 28 days of the issue date, which shortens
the legal timeframe available to the keeper.
While the back of the NtK attempts to reference the correct
timeframe, the most prominent instruction on the front is
incorrect and legally misleading. The contradictory timeframes
create confusion for the recipient and breach the requirement
for clarity and transparency under PoFA.
As established in Excel Parking v. Smith [2017] and Brennan v.
Premier Parking Logistics [2023], a Notice to Keeper must
strictly comply with the wording and timeframes set out in PoFA.
Any deviation from these requirements, particularly where it
misleads the recipient, renders the notice non-compliant.
Therefore, the operator cannot rely on PoFA to transfer
liability to the keeper.
Show us what you think you'll be sending as your POPLA appeal.
#Post#: 53469--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parkmaven NtK and unsuccessful appeal
By: kgw Date: January 15, 2025, 9:09 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hello,
OMG, I DID make a cut and paste mistake and left SmartParking !
That may explain the rejection although I have a feeling that
the letter I received was almost automatic.
I'm not sure how POPLA appeals work but I suppose I need to
repeat what you've just wonderfully explained about the 28 day
mistake.
PS: I suppose eventually they'll get their NtKs right. What
happens then ?
#Post#: 53473--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parkmaven NtK and unsuccessful appeal
By: DWMB2 Date: January 15, 2025, 9:48 am
---------------------------------------------------------
They'd have rejected either way.
[quote]I need to repeat what you've just wonderfully explained
about the 28 day mistake. [/quote]
Ideally your POPLA appeal will be more detailed. The audience is
not ParkMaven, but a POPLA assessor with no prior knowledge of
the case. Although they should be well trained, assume they know
nothing, and lead them to each point clearly, explaining exactly
why ParkMaven cannot recover the charges from you as the keeper.
[quote] PS: I suppose eventually they'll get their NtKs right.
What happens then ? [/quote]
They've had since 2012 so I'd be surprised if they get it right
any time soon. We'll pass that bridge when we come to it.
#Post#: 55694--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parkmaven NtK and unsuccessful appeal
By: kgw Date: January 29, 2025, 4:22 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hello,
Finally, I took the time to put together a draft for my POPLA
appeal:
"I received a Notice to Keeper from Parkmaven who allege that my
car registered xxxxx was parked without a valid parking session
on 17 Dec 2024 at “The Centre Feltham Surface”, a site operated
by Parkmaven.
The front of the Notice to Keeper prominently states:
“PAYMENT TO BE MADE WITHIN 28 DAYS OF THE DATE
ISSUED”.
This instruction contradicts the statutory requirement under the
Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) Schedule 4, Paragraph
9(2)(f), which mandates that the keeper be informed that they
have 28 days from the day after the notice is deemed to be given
(served) to either pay the charge or provide the driver's
details.
According to PoFA Schedule 4, Paragraph 9(6), a Notice to Keeper
is deemed to be served two working days after posting, meaning
the 28-day period must start after this deemed service date.
The instruction on the front of the Notice to Keeper, however,
misleadingly demands payment within 28 days of the issue date,
which shortens the legal timeframe available to the keeper.
As established in Excel Parking v. Smith [2017] and Brennan v.
Premier Parking Logistics [2023], a Notice to Keeper must
strictly comply with the wording and timeframes set out in PoFA.
Any deviation from these requirements, particularly where it
misleads the recipient, renders the notice non-compliant.
Therefore, Parkmaven cannot rely on the Protection of Freedoms
Act 2012, Schedule 4, paragraph 4 to transfer liability to me as
the keeper of the vehicle."
Suggestions welcome before I send this to POPLA. Thanks in
advance
#Post#: 55699--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parkmaven NtK and unsuccessful appeal
By: b789 Date: January 29, 2025, 5:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
You have to consider that the POPLA assessors can be is thick or
even moronically when it comes to calculating dates. As you are
pointing out that the NtK is not compliant on dates in relation
to both PoFA and the PPSCoP, you may want expand on how you show
the errors in the NtK with the following:
[quote]The operators NtK erroneously and unlawfully states very
boldly on the front that the payment is to be made by Tuesday
21st January 2025 (21/01/2025).
In order to show why this date is wrong we need to determine
when the Notice to Keeper (NtK) is deemed to have been given
(received) and when the 28-day appeal or payment period begins,
we follow these steps:
1. Issue Date:
[indent]• The NtK was issued on Tuesday, 24th December
2024.[/indent]
2. Deemed Delivery (PoFA Schedule 4, Paragraph 9(6))
[indent]• The notice is deemed to be given two working days
after the issue date.
• Non-working days (bank holidays and weekends) do not count.
• Wednesday, 25th December 2024 (Christmas Day) → Bank
Holiday
• Thursday, 26th December 2024 (Boxing Day) → Bank Holiday
• Saturday, 28th December 2024 and Sunday, 29th December 2024
→ Weekend (not working days)
The next working day is Friday, 27th December 2024 (counting as
Day 1).
The following working day (Day 2) is Monday, 30th December 2024.
So, the NtK is deemed to be given on Monday, 30th December
2024.[/indent]
3. Start of 28-day Period
[indent]• The 28-day period to appeal or pay starts the day
after the notice is deemed to be given.
• So, the period begins on Tuesday, 31st December 2024.[/indent]
4. Deadline for Appeal or Payment (End of 28 Days)
[indent]• Counting 28 days from 31st December 2024, the final
day of the period is Monday, 27th January 2025.[/indent]
Final Answer
The NtK is deemed to be received on Monday, 30th December 2024.
The 28-day appeal or payment period runs from Tuesday, 31st
December 2024, to Monday, 27th January 2025 (inclusive).[/quote]
#Post#: 55712--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parkmaven NtK and unsuccessful appeal
By: kgw Date: January 29, 2025, 6:36 am
---------------------------------------------------------
OK. Thanks I didn't know they needed to be spoonfed the obvious,
but I will.
So there's an issue with PPSCoP as well. What paragraph
(couldn't find it) ? Should I even mention it ?
#Post#: 55731--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parkmaven NtK and unsuccessful appeal
By: b789 Date: January 29, 2025, 8:11 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Don't send anything yet. You have plenty of time to prepare and
send the POPLA appeal.I will work a bit more on it.
#Post#: 55732--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parkmaven NtK and unsuccessful appeal
By: kgw Date: January 29, 2025, 8:15 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Updated draft:
"I’ve received a Notice to Keeper issued on 24/12/2024 by
Parkmaven who allege that my car registered xxxxxx was parked
without a valid parking session on 17/12/2024 at “The Centre
Feltham Surface”, a site operated by Parkmaven.
The front of the Notice to Keeper prominently states:
“PAYMENT TO BE MADE WITHIN 28 DAYS OF THE DATE ISSUED:
BY 21/01/2025”.
This instruction contradicts the statutory requirement under the
Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) Schedule 4, Paragraph
9(2)(f), which mandates that the keeper be informed that they
have 28 days from the day after the notice is deemed to be given
(served) to either pay the charge or provide the driver's
details. According to PoFA Schedule 4, Paragraph 9(6), a Notice
to Keeper is deemed to be served two working days after posting,
meaning the 28-day period must start after this deemed service
date.
The instruction on the front of the Notice to Keeper, however,
misleadingly demands payment within 28 days of the issue date,
which shortens the legal timeframe available to the keeper.
To prove this, we need to follow the legislation step-by-step:
the Notice to Keeper was issued on Tuesday 24/12/2024
Wednesday 25/12/2024 was a bank holiday (Christmas)
Thursday 26/12/2024 was a bank holiday (Boxing day)
Saturday, 28/12/2024 and Sunday, 29/12/2024 were a weekend (not
working days)
Therefore, the next working day after the Notice to Keeper was
issued was Friday, 27/12/2024 (counting as Day 1) and the
following working day (Day 2) was Monday, 30/12/2024.
So, according to PoFA Schedule 4, Paragraph 9(6) the Notice to
Keeper is deemed to have been given (served) on Monday, 30th
December 2024.
The 28-day period to appeal or pay started the day after the
notice is deemed to have been given. So, the 28-day period began
on Tuesday, 31st December 2024. The deadline for Appeal or
Payment was at the end of 28 days counting from 31st December
2024.
So the final day of the period was Monday, 27th January 2025
inclusive, not Tuesday 21st January as stated on the Notice to
Keeper.
As established in Excel Parking v. Smith [2017] and Brennan v.
Premier Parking Logistics [2023], a Notice to Keeper must
strictly comply with the wording and timeframes set out in PoFA.
Any deviation from these requirements, particularly where it
misleads the recipient, renders the notice non-compliant.
Therefore, Parkmaven cannot rely on the Protection of Freedoms
Act 2012, Schedule 4, paragraph 4 to transfer liability to me as
the keeper of the vehicle.
"
#Post#: 55733--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parkmaven NtK and unsuccessful appeal
By: kgw Date: January 29, 2025, 8:18 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Can't put my hand on the POPLA code anyhow :(
Please note that, in their appeal rejection letter, Parkmaven
mention 29 Jan as the last day to pay "only" £60.
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page