Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Private parking tickets => Topic started by: NuBoy on June 24, 2024, 11:09:48 pm
-
HC, Rookie and b789.
Thanks for you opinions and advice, I very much appreciate you taking the time to reply.
Ill return if/when there are any developments.
Thanks again.
-
Regarding the date of receipt of the NtK, you are wrong. It matters not what actual date you received the NtK. What matters is the date it was issued/sent after the date of the alleged parking event.
The date of the parking event is day zero. The date of issue or sending (if there's an envelope with a date stamp [unlikely]) is what matters. The issue date plus two working days is the date that the NtK is "given" or served. So, count the number of days from the zero date to the "given" date and if the number is 14 or less, then the NtK is valid, in that respect, for the purposes PoFA and keeper liability.
As stated by @The Rookie, you are now in the limbo stage of waiting to see if/when they issue an LoC and a claim. You can safely ignore all debt collector letters. They are harmless and have no say in the matter.
If/when you receive an LoC or a claim, come back for advice nohow to handle it.
-
which has now ended up with a demand for £170 is worth appealing.
1/ They can 'demand' (ask for) any sum they like,. whether it is owed or not is a different matter. Courts habitually through out the unjustified added on (and not incurred) £70 for debt collection so if you made an offer to pay £100 (under a without prejudice save as to costs basis) they would be in a quandary, if they reject and take you to court and win £100 you have a case they cannot reclaim any costs of their claim at all as they had no basis for taking you to court at all. They may reject the offer and then pretty much make taking you to court a pointless exercise.
2/ Appeal opportunity is now gone, dead and buried, pushing up the daisies etc You now either pay or wait to see if they want to chance their arm in court where you would DEFEND the claim.
-
Thanks for looking over the paperwork b789
I’m a bit confused on your dating of the correspondence.
I realised my appeal had been rejected on 22nd May - On this date I received their letter dated 16/5/24 referring to appeal rejection correspondence (never received).
I requested a POPLAR code on 23rd May by letter.
I received the POPLAR code on 11th June (in a letter dated 6/6/24)
Thanks for the clarification HC.
I now see my Date stamp objection is redundant (my eyes can only see it on a scanner enlargement!). To be honest, if I had seen the date stamp at the top of the pictures I would have paid the invoice at the settled amount of £60.
Now you may say I’m a cantankerous fool, but I think the company’s failure to engage with me over the genuine issue of not receiving the appeal notice, which has now ended up with a demand for £170 is worth appealing.
There is the other appeal point - that the notice was not delivered within the prescribed period.
POFA 2012 Schedule 4. Section 9 .4 (b) states; "The notice must be given by – (b) sending it by post to a current address for service for the keeper so that it is delivered to that address within the relevant period. (5) The relevant period for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4) is the period of 14 days beginning with the day after that on which the specified period of parking ended.”
Date of parking charge -18/03/2024 …..Notice received 6/04/2024. That’s 19 days.
The date of issue of the PCN is 27/3/2024. That’s 9 days after the incident but that’s just a date on a piece of paper; what about postage time? I have always received Group Nexus correspondence around 6 days after any date on their correspondence.
Mmmm, where do I go now? Wait for their next move?
-
Having now put this point to one side, OP pl deal with the substance of their allegation.
Mediation is offered after a Letter of Claim is issued by the creditor. You are not there yet.
The CoP is not law. As per The Rookie, there was either a breach of contract giving rise to a claim or not. The CoP and PoFA overlap in places, but as regards holding the RK liable it's PoFA which applies to the point of making a claim. But when the creditor is pursuing the person they believe to be the driver then it's redundant and only contract law applies.
-
There are a couple of points that may have some relevance should this ever get as far as a hearing. I note in one of the pictures of the correspondence that they did sent you a reminder of your POPLA code.
It says your appeal rejection and POPLA code were sent on 21st March. The letter/e-mail? Is dated 18th April. Whilst the letter always states that a POPLA code is only valid for 28 days, they are in fact, valid for 33 days. Had you known this, you could have submitted a POPLA appeal up to the 22nd April.
Whilst the above may be useful information for future reference, it does not help you at this stage. What may be of interest is on what date did you find out that your appeal had been rejected and subsequently request a copy of your POPLA code that prompted the reply you received on 18th April?
There are other matters which I will come back to but I don’t have any spare time at the moment except to point out that your allegation of a breach of BOA CoP 21.5a is unfounded. The timestamps on the evidential photos on the NtK are timestamped. The black bar across the top of the phots bear the timestamp.
-
Again thank you for your responses. If I question any advice or opinion, it's not because I'm challenging your views, but just to understand the situation better. All opinions are gratefully received.
Rookie, I agree with your your point, "The money is either owed or not,"
But would a court not take the view that it was reasonable for the Driver/vehicle owner to expect that an invoice claiming money for breach of contract would provide direct evidence of that breach, in line with the BPI code of conduct (i.e Time/Date stamped photographs)?
HC, how would you advise that I mediate at this point? G.N state in their letter they will not "enter into any further correspondence."
Also would you say that not following the BPI code relating to Date/Time stamped evidence will be viewed by a court as a merely procedural point. What evidence are they going to provide to the court on the entry and exit times?
Thanks again for your considerations.
-
, to ignore that information is malpractice
At the end of the parking either money was owed by the driver or was not, what happens after that does NOT change whether money is owed or not. It's not a regulated process where their failure to do something somehow makes your liability disappear.
If you appealed online they usually reply via email and the rejection emails very often go into spam folders (almost as if by design...) if that is the case you did 'receive' it, you just didn't see it.
-
Once G.N were aware that I claimed I had not received their appeal decision, to ignore that information is malpractice (lack of ordinary skill, or a breach of duty in the performance of a professional service).
Exactly, you claimed you didn't receive. I imagine they get thousands of 'I didn't receive' every week and treat them the same which IMO they're entitled to do otherwise motorists could have creditors dancing endlessly to this tune.
If they choose not to reset the clock and we go to court, would not the court's view be that they are wasting the courts time because they have not followed the due process by trying to reach agreement before court action.
No, because you have the option of engaging in mediation before court.
As regards your defence, did you 'out' the driver in your appeal or subsequent correspondence and was your appeal based solely upon what you perceived to be a procedural (CoP) point to which a court would attach little weight IMO i.e. you didn't challenge that the car was there for a period in excess of the permitted maximum. The times are included in the NTK.
-
Thank you for your replies.
As you suggested, here is the link for Imgur with all the paperwork to date;
https://imgur.com/a/vkJv9Jz
The main plank of my initial appeal was that the company did not provide any objective evidence in their invoice (PCN) of a breach of contract as the photos were not time/date stamped (contrary to their trade organisation's (BPA) code - Sect 21.5a- "Photographic evidence must not be used...unless the images bear an accurate time and date stamp....)
Is not the position now that my defence is now both my original defence points plus G.N's conduct. Once G.N were aware that I claimed I had not received their appeal decision, to ignore that information is malpractice (lack of ordinary skill, or a breach of duty in the performance of a professional service).
If they choose not to reset the clock and we go to court, would not the court's view be that they are wasting the courts time because they have not followed the due process by trying to reach agreement before court action.
What's your suggestion b789?
-
IMO, you do not have any evidence of malpractice on their part.
Just stand back...
The facts as you've set them out are that they did receive and consider your appeal and they have provided you with their response which you claim you did not receive. You cannot prove you didn't receive in time(but simply ignore), how can one prove a negative?
In short: in all probability this is nothing more than a letter going missing the effect of which is that your POPLA code has expired. Posting and service of their reply would be taken as being a fact on the balance of probabilities.
If they choose not to reset the process- which is their choice IMO-then the ball is in their court.
Contrary to what you posted, the issue is the alleged contravention and your defence, it is not your claim to have not to received the letter. This arises because their next step is court.
You can of course rattle their cage and engage in the extra-procedural actions you've suggested, this is your choice. But I ask you just to consider the objective facts again and provide the docs referred to by b789.
-
Not the right approach. First things first, please show us the NtK. As this is GroupNexus, you have probably gone about this the wrong way but may be recoverable.
READ THIS FIRST - Private Parking Charges Forum guide (https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/)
-
I received a Parking Charge Notice from Group Nexus for overstaying in a retail car park. I appealed via the company’s online portal, receiving confirmation of receipt. (I am not detailing my grounds of appeal because I believe that is no longer the issue now).
I received no notice of their rejection of my appeal, neither by post or email.
The first I realised that I had not received their appeal decision was when I received a parking Charge Reminder. I wrote to them stating they had either ignored my online appeal or I had not received their decision, and included my appeal in hard-copy.
They replied, ignoring the content of my letter, saying I should…. “refer to our previous correspondence” (which I had told them I had not received)!
I wrote to them, again telling them I had received no appeal decision and asked for a POPLAR verification code in order to appeal through POPLA.
They replied, still ignoring the fact that I had not received their appeal decision, giving me a POPLAR code, but telling me it was now out of date!
So what do I do next?
My plan is to make a formal complaint - in line with their complaints policy. Then follow with a POPLAR complaint, then perhaps a Trading Standards complaint. My objective is to gather as much evidence of the company’s malpractice as possible before it eventually ends in court.
Would you say this is the right approach?