URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
  HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 55660--------------------------------------------------
       UKPC PCN- Not parked within the bay- Lower Precinct, Coventry
   DIR By: dalooah
       Date: January 28, 2025, 4:23 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I have recieved this PCN for not parking wholly within the bay.
       I am the registered keeper. The bay in question is a parent and
       child bay that has a massive pillar within it that obstructs a
       larger car from parking properly. Had the car been exactly
       within the signed bay, the 3 children in the backseat would not
       have been able to exit the vehicle and the car on the right hand
       side of the vehicle would have also been significantly
       obstructed- all of which has not surprisingly, been ignored by
       the parking attendant.
  HTML https://i.imgur.com/LyWLkQJ.jpeg
  HTML https://i.imgur.com/kCqRYXL.jpeg
  HTML https://i.imgur.com/OTOsrJF.jpeg
  HTML https://i.imgur.com/DNqJtEq.jpeg
  HTML https://i.imgur.com/i8XcOEY.jpeg
  HTML https://i.imgur.com/7Dm7x6b.jpeg
  HTML https://i.imgur.com/2lAc3Bj.jpeg
       The photo of the signage isn't very clear and I don't have my
       own photos.
       Asking the shopping center management to intervenet is wholly
       useless as it clearly states on their website to contact UKPC
       directly.
       Any ideas how to appeal this successfully?
       #Post#: 55690--------------------------------------------------
       Re: UKPC PCN- Not parked within the bay- Lower Precinct,
       Coventry
   DIR By: b789
       Date: January 29, 2025, 3:55 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       You will not be paying a penny to UKPC if you follow the advice.
       For now, hopefully, UKPC have no idea who the driver is. Do not
       blab the drivers identity if you are the Keeper who has received
       the Notice to Keeper (NtK) by saying things like "I did this or
       that". As the Keeper, you only refer to the driver in the third
       person such as "The driver did this or that".
       The NtK is not PoFA compliant and there can be no Keeper
       liability. The only way that UKPC would know the drivers
       identity is if the Keeper blabs it, inadvertently or otherwise.
       As the Keeper is the named person on the NtK heed the following
       instructions and follow them without editing anything in the
       appeal.
       --- Quote ---
       > 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.
       >
       > Use the following as your appeal. No need to embellish or
       remove anything from it:
       >
       > [quote]I am the keeper of the vehicle and I dispute your
       'parking charge'. 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, 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. UKPC 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.
       UKPC have no hope at POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a
       complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.
       --- End Quote ---
       [/quote]
       The appeal will be rejected, no matter what is in it but it puts
       them on notice that they are not dealing with low-hanging fruit
       on the gullible tree and gets a POPLA code.
       Come back when you receive the appeal rejection or any other
       correspondence from them for the next steps.
       #Post#: 59057--------------------------------------------------
       Re: UKPC PCN- Not parked within the bay- Lower Precinct,
       Coventry
   DIR By: dalooah
       Date: February 20, 2025, 10:39 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Thanks for the help so far. I submitted the appeal as above and
       I was expecting a rejection but I have just been sent a letter
       asking for the drivers name and address in order for the appeal
       to be considered.
  HTML https://i.imgur.com/R4Df9oB.jpeg
       Am I correct in thinking that I can ignore this, or do I
       reiterate that I will not be confirming the details of the
       person driving?
       #Post#: 59062--------------------------------------------------
       Re: UKPC PCN- Not parked within the bay- Lower Precinct,
       Coventry
   DIR By: jfollows
       Date: February 20, 2025, 11:43 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Yes, ignore.
       Anything you would say to them in writing would likely be to
       your detriment.
       #Post#: 59076--------------------------------------------------
       Re: UKPC PCN- Not parked within the bay- Lower Precinct,
       Coventry
   DIR By: b789
       Date: February 20, 2025, 1:04 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Don't tell 'em your name Pike!
       #Post#: 59881--------------------------------------------------
       Re: UKPC PCN- Not parked within the bay- Lower Precinct,
       Coventry
   DIR By: dalooah
       Date: February 27, 2025, 8:45 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Having ignored the recent correspondance, it has been 28 days
       since I submitted the appeal and have not had a response. Should
       I follow up or hope its done and dusted?
       #Post#: 59895--------------------------------------------------
       Re: UKPC PCN- Not parked within the bay- Lower Precinct,
       Coventry
   DIR By: b789
       Date: February 27, 2025, 10:29 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       It's not "done and dusted", but why would you want to "follow it
       up"? Te=he ball is in their court and if they haven't responded
       within the required timeframe, then you can make a formal
       complaint later. Just wait for them to respond.
       #Post#: 62453--------------------------------------------------
       Re: UKPC PCN- Not parked within the bay- Lower Precinct,
       Coventry
   DIR By: dalooah
       Date: March 14, 2025, 4:34 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I've finally recieved a rejection to my initial appeal.
       Here is the letter:
  HTML https://i.imgur.com/elahK60.jpeg
       I believe I have a case at POPLA because of the awkward shape of
       the parking space the driver was forced to park in- it was a
       parent and child space and the driver had three children under 8
       with them- but the pillar at the front of the parking space
       meant the driver had to park very slighly on the hashed marking
       in order to ensure they and the cars around them could get in
       and out of their vehicles.
  HTML https://i.imgur.com/WfzTPMM.jpeg
       This is the original NtK.
       I also believe the NtK isn't POFA compliant but I'm not sure on
       what grounds? I'm certain they have calculated their dates
       incorrectly, because I recieved a "final notice" in the post on
       27/01/2025 which clearly showed the 14 day early payment
       discount had already ended on that date- whereas, according to
       my calculations it shouldn't have ended till: 29/01, and thus
       the end of the 28 day period- which isn't stated on any of the
       letters should have been: 12/02.
       Alledged contrvention: 10/01
       NtK dated: 13/01
       So first day of the 28 day period should be: 16/01
       Final Reminder stating 14 days have lapsed and 14 days
       remaining: 27/01 which is only 12 days after the NtK?
       Any help with crafting my appeal to POPLA would be appreciated.
       #Post#: 62454--------------------------------------------------
       Re: UKPC PCN- Not parked within the bay- Lower Precinct,
       Coventry
   DIR By: dalooah
       Date: March 14, 2025, 4:37 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Just in case its useful, the final reminder letter I received in
       the post.
  HTML https://i.imgur.com/WDbZeAE.jpeg
       #Post#: 62473--------------------------------------------------
       Re: UKPC PCN- Not parked within the bay- Lower Precinct,
       Coventry
   DIR By: jfollows
       Date: March 14, 2025, 6:34 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       POPLA won’t take “mitigating circumstances” into account, which
       I think you’re relying on.
       Basically they’ll say if you couldn’t park “correctly” then you
       should have parked somewhere else.
       Stick to lack of PoFA compliance meaning you can not be liable,
       you will get help on how to spell this out I’m sure. No hurry.
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 3
   DIR Next Page