DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 58549--------------------------------------------------
Re: NPC Ticket not received
DIR By: b789
Date: February 17, 2025, 8:45 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Why would you want to pay? You are dealing with a bunch of
ex-clamper scammers. Respond to that response with the
following:
--- Quote ---
> Subject: Re: Formal Complaint – Failure of Proper Notification
& Request for Proof of Posting (PCN: [PCN Number])
>
> Dear [NPC Representative],
>
> Your response does not adequately address my complaint
regarding the failure of proper service of this PCN.
Additionally, I now require you to provide specific evidence
under Section 8.1.2(e) Note 2 of the Private Parking Single Code
of Practice (PPSCoP) confirming the date the Notice to Keeper
(NtK) was actually posted.
>
> The PPSCoP states:
>
> [indent]"A notice sent by post is to be presumed, unless the
contrary is proved, to have been delivered on the second working
day after the day on which it is posted; and for this purpose,
“working day” means any day other than a Saturday, Sunday or a
public holiday in England and Wales. Therefore, parking
operators must retain a record of the date of posting of a
notice, not simply of that notice having been generated (e.g.
the date that any third-party Mail Consolidator actually put it
in the postal system.)”[/indent]
>
> You must therefore provide actual proof of posting and not
simply confirmation that the notice was generated on a specific
date. If you use Royal Mail, the only acceptable evidence that
proves the date of posting is:
>
> [indent]• A Proof of Posting Certificate issued by Royal Mail,
or
> • An equivalent record from a bulk mailing service confirming
when the notice entered the postal system.(Not simply the date
they received the hybrid mail from your system)[/indent]
>
> If you fail to provide this evidence, it raises serious doubts
about whether the NtK was actually sent. While I acknowledge my
ongoing Royal Mail misdelivery issues, there remains the
possibility that the notice was never posted at all.
>
> Required Actions
>
> [indent]1. Provide documentary proof of the exact date and
method of posting for the NtK, as required under the PPSCoP.
> 2. Reissue the PCN at the original amount and allow me to
appeal, as I was denied this opportunity.
> 3. Place the case on hold while this dispute is
resolved.[/indent]
>
> If you refuse to provide the required proof of posting, I
will:
>
> [indent]• Escalate a complaint to the IPC, highlighting your
failure to follow PPSCoP requirements and fair practice
obligations.
> • Report the matter to the ICO if you continue to process my
data without confirming that I was properly notified.
> • Defend any legal action on the basis of lack of proper
service, procedural unfairness, and your failure to provide
required evidence.[/indent]
>
> I expect your response within 7 days. If you do not provide
the required proof or a fair resolution, I will escalate the
matter accordingly.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> [Your Full Name]
> [Your Contact Information]
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 58590--------------------------------------------------
Re: NPC Ticket not received
DIR By: gimpel
Date: February 17, 2025, 10:53 am
---------------------------------------------------------
They did actually send prove of postage what should I do
#Post#: 58596--------------------------------------------------
Re: NPC Ticket not received
DIR By: b789
Date: February 17, 2025, 11:20 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Is this really proof of postage?
Does that comply with with the requirement in the PPSCoP that
"Therefore, parking operators must retain a record of the date
of posting of a notice, not simply of that notice having been
generated (e.g. the date that any third-party Mail Consolidator
actually put it in the postal system.)"?
What do you think that document proves?
--- Quote from: b789 link ---
>
> You must therefore provide actual proof of posting and not
simply confirmation that the notice was generated on a specific
date. If you use Royal Mail, the only acceptable evidence that
proves the date of posting is:
>
> [indent]• A Proof of Posting Certificate issued by Royal Mail,
or
> • An equivalent record from a bulk mailing service confirming
when the notice entered the postal system.(Not simply the date
they received the hybrid mail from your system)[/indent]
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 58598--------------------------------------------------
Re: NPC Ticket not received
DIR By: b789
Date: February 17, 2025, 11:31 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Do you really think that this is "proof of postage"?
HTML https://i.imgur.com/HHEFwZI.jpeg
Respond with the following:
--- Quote ---
> Subject: Insufficient Proof of Notice Posting Date –
Non-Compliance with PPSCoP Section 8.1.2(e)
>
> Dear National Parking Control Limited,
>
> I am writing to challenge the validity of the "Certificate of
Postage" you have provided as evidence of the Notice to Keeper
(NtK) being posted.
>
> Under Section 8.1.2(e), Note 2 of the Private Parking Single
Code of Practice (PPSCoP), parking operators must retain a
record of the date of posting of a notice, not simply the date
that the notice was generated. Specifically, the Code states:
>
> [indent]“Therefore, parking operators must retain a record of
the date of posting of a notice, not simply of that notice
having been generated (e.g. the date that any third-party Mail
Consolidator actually put it in the postal system).”[/indent]
>
> The document you have provided—titled a Certificate of
Postage—confirms that the notice was sent via a hybrid mail
system, but it fails to confirm the actual date on which the
notice was physically handed over to the postal service provider
(e.g., Royal Mail, Whistl, or any other recognised postal
carrier).
>
> Your document states:
>
> [indent]• Date Sent: 20/12/2024 at 09:40:34 AM
> • Delivery Class: 2-3 day delivery[/indent]
>
> However, this does not establish that the notice was actually
entered into the postal system on that date, only that it was
processed by Unity5’s hybrid mail system. There is no evidence
of when Unity5, acting as a third-party mail consolidator,
physically handed the notice over to the postal carrier.
>
> Why This Fails to Comply with PPSCoP Section 8.1.2(e), Note 2:
>
> [indent]1. The Certificate of Postage lacks confirmation from
a recognised postal service provider (e.g., Royal Mail, Whistl).
> 2. It does not specify when the notice was physically handed
over to the postal system.
> 3. The PPSCoP explicitly requires operators to record when a
third-party Mail Consolidator actually put it in the postal
system, not merely when it was processed.[/indent]
>
> Request for Proper Proof of Posting
>
> To comply with the PPSCoP, I request that you provide
documentary evidence from the postal carrier (e.g., a Royal Mail
receipt, Whistl lodgement record, or similar) confirming the
actual date of physical postage. If you are unable to provide
such proof, then you have failed to meet the PPSCoP's evidence
requirements, and the presumption of service under the
Interpretation Act 1978 cannot apply.
>
> Please confirm how you intend to rectify this compliance
failure.
>
> Yours sincerely,
>
> [Your Name]
> [Your Address]
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 58601--------------------------------------------------
Re: NPC Ticket not received
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: February 17, 2025, 11:44 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I've removed that last document as it contained your full name
and home address.
#Post#: 58714--------------------------------------------------
Re: NPC Ticket not received
DIR By: gimpel
Date: February 18, 2025, 7:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks
#Post#: 58757--------------------------------------------------
Re: NPC Ticket not received
DIR By: gimpel
Date: February 18, 2025, 10:56 am
---------------------------------------------------------
They replied with this
Good afternoon,
Thank you for your email.
While we take your comments into consideration, the code you
refer to is relatively new and permits a period of transition.
We are not required to meet the new standards in full until
December 2026.
Anything I can reply?
#Post#: 58766--------------------------------------------------
Re: NPC Ticket not received
DIR By: b789
Date: February 18, 2025, 11:27 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Just to show you how utterly devoid of intelligence these
feckwits at NPC are, here is the wording and table of deadlines
from page 3 of the PPSCoP:
HTML https://i.imgur.com/jBozeYj.png
The main bit is:
--- Quote ---
> All aspects of the Code must be complied with except signage
or other related clauses applicable to existing sites.
--- End Quote ---
I will formulate a response shortly.
#Post#: 58770--------------------------------------------------
Re: NPC Ticket not received
DIR By: b789
Date: February 18, 2025, 11:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Respond with the following:
--- Quote ---
> Dear NPC,
>
> Thank you for your pitiful response, which has done nothing
but confirm your ignorance of the very rules you are supposed to
follow as required by the BPA/IPC Private Parking Single Code of
Practice (PPSCoP). It appears that either basic reading
comprehension or integrity is in short supply at your company.
>
> Let me explain this in simple terms, since you seem to
struggle with your own industry’s Code of Practice.
>
> Your claim that you are not required to meet the PPSCoP in
full until December 2026 is categorically false. Had you taken
the time to read Page 3 of the PPSCoP, you would have seen the
following:
>
> [indent]From 1st October 2024, all aspects of the Code must be
complied with, except for signage requirements for existing
sites.[/indent]
>
> Just so as you fully understand what that means, is that your
obligation to retain a record of the actual date of posting has
been in effect since October 2024. Your failure to provide a
proper proof of postage from a recognised postal provider (Royal
Mail, Whistl, or equivalent) is a direct breach of PPSCoP
Section 8.1.2(e), Note 2.
>
> Instead of a legitimate proof of posting, you have attempted
to palm me off with an irrelevant “Certificate of Postage” that
merely shows when your third-party hybrid mail processor
generated the notice, not when it was actually handed over to
the postal service.
>
> This is not sufficient evidence to invoke the presumption of
service under the Interpretation Act 1978. If you are not are
what that means, pass this correspondence to someone who is
capable of understanding what it does mean.
>
> DVLA Complaint and Your Breach of the KADOE Agreement
>
> Since you have now publicly admitted (in writing, no less!)
that you are not complying with the PPSCoP, you have also
confirmed that you are in breach of your KADOE agreement with
the DVLA. Your access to DVLA keeper data is strictly
conditional upon compliance with the relevant Code of
Practice—which you have just declared you do not follow. Duh!
>
> As such, your response will be submitted as formal evidence in
a complaint to the DVLA, requesting that they review your KADOE
access due to your failure to meet the necessary compliance
standards. I'm sure a competent adult will be able to explain to
you the likely consequences of this.
>
> What Happens Next
>
> [indent]1. Provide a proper lodgement record from a recognised
postal provider (not Unity5’s internal timestamp nonsense).
> 2. If you cannot provide this, cancel the charge immediately.
> 3. If you refuse, expect to be reported to the DVLA, where you
now face the very real risk of losing access to keeper data due
to your utter incompetence.
> 4. If you still persist in this farce, I will see you in
court, where your inability to comply with the PPSCoP and your
laughable approach to procedural fairness will earn you a
well-deserved costs order for unreasonable behaviour under CPR
27.14(2)(g).[/indent]
>
> I suggest that before you embarrass yourselves any further,
you escalate this matter to someone within your company who is
capable of understanding the PPSCoP, the KADOE agreement, and
the serious implications of breaching both.
>
> I look forward to your correct response—not another load of
mendacious drivel.
>
> Yours sincerely,
>
> [Your Name]
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 58856--------------------------------------------------
Re: NPC Ticket not received
DIR By: gimpel
Date: February 19, 2025, 7:13 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi this was their reply
Good morning,
We have provided all necessary documents.
If you are unhappy with the outcome of your complaint, please
refer this to the IPC, our Accredited Trade Association
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 3
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page