Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
From APCOA Appeals dept:QuoteThank you for your letter received on 05 November 2024 regarding the above Parking Charge Notice.
Having considered the circumstances, we have cancelled the Parking Charge Notice on this occasion.
Please retain this letter as proof of cancellation, should you need it in the future.
Thank you for your letter received on 05 November 2024 regarding the above Parking Charge Notice.
Having considered the circumstances, we have cancelled the Parking Charge Notice on this occasion.
Please retain this letter as proof of cancellation, should you need it in the future.
In which case you can use the appeal provided and just change the name of the PPC to APCOA. That PCN is not PoFA compliant.
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.HorizonAPCOA 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. APCOA have no hope at POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.
In which case you can use the appeal provided and just change the name of the PPC to APCOA. That PCN is not PoFA compliant.
Oh dear... has there been any communication with Horizon that reveal the driver identity? For example has the Keeper (the recipient of the Notice to Keeper (NtK)), mentioned or given away that they were the driver?
That NtK is not fully compliant with all the requirements of PoFA and so the keeper cannot be liable unless they have admitted to being the driver, inadvertently or otherwise.
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:QuoteI 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. Horizon 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. Horizon have no hope at POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.