DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 54178--------------------------------------------------
PCN received despite not staying in car park
DIR By: beano5892
Date: January 20, 2025, 6:29 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi
My mum and dad went into an NCP car park on 16 December '24
They went to ticket machine and waited in line for someone to
unsuccessfully pay for a ticket.
When it was their turn, they realised the ticket was not
accepting cash or card payment, so Dad then tried to download
the app to pay but failed as no reception. He then returned to
the car to try with my Mum's phone but had the same issue. They
couldn't figure out how else to pay so got in the car and went
and parked somewhere else. This whole process took 17 minutes..
they are quite elderly and don't move/ do things quickly which
has slowed the process down.
They have now received a PCN from NCP.
Please can you advise if they have grounds for appeal and, if
so, what wording they should use?
They are quite elderly so not moving so quickly to and from
things
Many thanks
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 54185--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN received despite not staying in car park
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: January 20, 2025, 7:11 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I've removed those attachments - you might want to hide your
mum's name and address before re-uploading.
#Post#: 54197--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN received despite not staying in car park
DIR By: Dave65
Date: January 20, 2025, 8:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
First we need to see the PPN with personal details redacted but
leave times and dates.
There have been a number of these PPN`s over too long to take to
pay and usually they are using the 5 minutes.
A couple of these PPN`s have hit the media and one they took to
court in Sheffield was dismissed by the judge.
Also, the BPA and IPA are looking at possible altering this.
We`ll wait and see on this.
#Post#: 54200--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN received despite not staying in car park
DIR By: beano5892
Date: January 20, 2025, 8:48 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Dave65 link ---
>
> First we need to see the PPN with personal details redacted
but leave times and dates.
>
> There have been a number of these PPN`s over too long to take
to pay and usually they are using the 5 minutes.
>
> A couple of these PPN`s have hit the media and one they took
to court in Sheffield was dismissed by the judge.
>
> Also, the BPA and IPA are looking at possible altering this.
We`ll wait and see on this.
>
--- End Quote ---
Thanks for this.
I've redacted and re-uploaded.
I saw the Sheffield case.. she had loads for the same reason I
believe!
I know about the 5 minute "rule" but my concern here is that the
whole process took way longer than this, even though they were
trying to pay the whole time. Without meaning to sound terrible,
they don't move so quickly these days and it can take a while
for them to use their phone/ download apps etc so I just think
it's grossly unfair but don't know how best to appeal.
Look forward to getting some advice/ feedback.
As always, thanks in advance
#Post#: 54205--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN received despite not staying in car park
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: January 20, 2025, 9:38 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Just to confirm - is your mum the registered keeper of the
vehicle, with the V5C document in her name (i.e. not a
financed/leased vehicle etc.)? If so, and this is the first
notice received, then NCP have sent the notice too late to be
able to recover the charge from the keeper, using the provisions
of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act. As such, they
can only hold the driver liable, and they don't know who that
is!
Your mother can therefore appeal online, as the keeper only,
along the lines of the below:
[indent]Dear Sirs,
I have received your Parking Charge Notice (Ref: ________) for
vehicle registration mark ____ ___, in which you allege that the
driver has incurred a parking charge. I note from your
correspondence that you are not seeking to hold me liable as the
registered keeper, under Schedule 4 of the Protection of
Freedoms Act 2012 ("The Act"). You have chosen not to issue a
Notice to Keeper in accordance with The Act, and it is now too
late for you to do so.
There is no obligation for me to name the driver and I will not
be doing so. I am therefore unable to help you further with this
matter, and look forward to your confirmation that the charge
has been cancelled. If you choose to decline this appeal, you
must issue a POPLA code.
Yours,[/indent]
If appealing online, be careful there are no drop down/tick
boxes that cause you to identify who was driving, and keep a
close eye on your spam folder for their response. If they do not
respond within 28 days, chase them.
If your mum struggles with tech, you can do it for her, but the
appeal must be done in her name and address etc.
The arguments around time taken etc. are all perfectly valid,
but the above is a much easier approach.
#Post#: 54210--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN received despite not staying in car park
DIR By: b789
Date: January 20, 2025, 9:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
As above... you can do all the work but it MUST be in the
Keepers name.
Easy one to defeat... as long as the unknown drivers identity is
not revealed. There is no legal obligation on the known keeper
(the recipient of the Notice to Keeper (NtK)) to reveal the
identity of the unknown driver and no inference or assumptions
can be made.
The NtK is not compliant with all the requirements of PoFA which
means that if the unknown driver is not identified, they cannot
transfer liability for the charge from the unknown driver to the
known keeper.
If you use the suggested appeal above by
[member=103]DWMB2[/member], NCP will cancel the PCN.
#Post#: 54244--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN received despite not staying in car park
DIR By: beano5892
Date: January 20, 2025, 2:11 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: b789 link ---
>
> As above... you can do all the work but it MUST be in the
Keepers name.
>
> Easy one to defeat... as long as the unknown drivers identity
is not revealed. There is no legal obligation on the known
keeper (the recipient of the Notice to Keeper (NtK)) to reveal
the identity of the unknown driver and no inference or
assumptions can be made.
>
> The NtK is not compliant with all the requirements of PoFA
which means that if the unknown driver is not identified, they
cannot transfer liability for the charge from the unknown driver
to the known keeper.
>
> If you use the suggested appeal above by
[member=103]DWMB2[/member], NCP will cancel the PCN.
>
--- End Quote ---
Hi there
Thanks for this. I've forwarded your replies to my parents, but
I'm just a little concerned that the PCN actually doesn't fall
under PoFA as there is no mention of PoFA on the PCN and I
thought (probably mistakenly!) that the PCN had to state that it
was being issued under PoFA otherwise it isn't and then the 14
day period doesn't apply .. it jumps to 7 months? Or is it PoFA
beacuse they've gone to DVLA to get keepers name and are chasing
the keeper not the driver so it therefore slips into PoFA.
Dad looked on Citizens Advice website and they said that it
wasn't PoFA if no mention and so he doesn't want to appeal
unless he's sure!
Sorry for the questions and thanks in advance
#Post#: 54260--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN received despite not staying in car park
DIR By: ixxy
Date: January 20, 2025, 3:23 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
This isn't the same as the issues with Excel parking and their
punitive you must pay within 5 minute rule which I believe will
be banned with an imminent update to the joint code of practice
and just as well as it's nothing other than a trap. In this case
the person stayed in car park for longer than the 5 minute
consideration period and failed to pay. I think it's unlikely
that will be changed any time soon although I think a minimum of
a 10 minute consideration period would be more appropriate in
car parks inviting people to park like this. 17 minutes is
pushing it a bit.
If the PCN is not POFA compliant then that's the best grounds
for appeal, do not name the driver. Not being POFA complaint
works in your Dad's favour, he can't be held liable for the PCN
as the vehicles keeper unless he admits driving and there's no
legal reason why he should admit that. If the PCN was POFA
complaint then your Dad could have been held liable even if he
wasn't the driver unless he named the driver. So non POFA PCN is
a get out of jail free. Use DWMB2 appeal word for word and that
should kill it dead. The private parking company can't win in
court so other than possibly some toothless letters there's
nothing more they can do and they will know it, no point in
wasting more money on something can't win.
#Post#: 54285--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN received despite not staying in car park
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: January 20, 2025, 4:42 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: ixxy link ---
>
> 17 minutes is pushing it a bit.
>
--- End Quote ---
I could think of circumstances where 17 minutes could probably
be reasonably argued, especially where you factor in entering
the car park, finding a space, reading the signage, queuing at
the payment machine, discovering it is not working, trying to
download an app on 2 separate phones due to poor signal, giving
up and driving back out again.
One would hope a reasonable judge would be amenable to such an
argument, but thankfully in this case there'll be no need to
test out that theory.
#Post#: 54291--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN received despite not staying in car park
DIR By: b789
Date: January 20, 2025, 6:15 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
A PCN does not have mention PoFA to be compliant. It only has to
comply with the requirements of the Act.
The PCN being discussed here does NOT comply with all the
requirements. As it does not fully comply with ALL the
requirements, it is therefore NOT PoFA compliant and so the
Keeper cannot be liable for the charge.
Don’t try to overthink it.
Never rely on the CAB to understand the nuances of the
unregulated private parking industry. They are worse than
useless when it comes to advising on these matters. They are
well known to actually get people who follow their flawed advice
into worse trouble.
We are experts on handling these matters and even advise the
judiciary (well, I do) and other legal professionals. We are
specialists.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page