Show Posts - HarveyT

Hello all - as the registered keeper of the vehicle I received the following from the IAS in response to my appeal - In all Appeals the burden of proof is the civil one whereby the party asserting a fact or submission has to establish that matter on the balance of probabilities. If the parking operator fails to establish that a Parking Charge Notice was properly issued in accordance with the law, then it is likely that an Appeal will be allowed. If the parking operator does establish that a Parking Charge Notice was properly and legally issued, then the burden shifts to the Appellant to establish that the notice was improperly or unlawfully issued and if the Appellant proves those matters on the balance of probabilities, then it is likely that the Appeal will be allowed. However, the Appeal will be dismissed if the Appellant fails to establish those matters on the balance of probabilities. The responsibility is at all times on the parties to provide the Adjudicator with the evidential basis upon which to make a decision.The Operator has provided evidence of the signs at the site. These make it clear any driver not paying for the duration of their stay will be issued with the parking charge notice.The Appellant claims that the Operator must claim against the driver, since they did not comply with POFA, and are therefore unable to claim against the keeper. The basis for this is that the notice was not received within the required timescales. Whilst I accept the premise I reject the conclusion.The fourteen days begins on the day after the parking event, so in this case the first day would be 2nd of August. The notice was sent on the 11th. The rules state that this is deemed served as received on the second working day after this date. This would be the 13th and well within the 14 day deadline.The Appellant claims the notice arrived on the 18th outside of the 14 day deadline. Even if this were the case the rules are clear that it is assumed to be received on the 13th, unless there is clear evidence to the contrary. In the absence of corroboration I cannot accept this claim on its face.The Operator has provided photographic evidence of the Appellant's vehicle leaving the land they manage, twelve minutes after it arrived, and without a payment for this vehicle. The appeal is dismissed."As the keeper what should I do?  Offer to pay 60 to get them off my back. 

OK - many thanks for the help.I will appeal to IAS and take if from there.

Thanks - i guess i was wondering if the 14 days still stands? Smart Parking say they 'posted' it on the 11th - the 'offence' happened on the 1st but I as the registered keeper didn't get the parking charge until the 18th.  Is is worth appealing on those grounds or should I just pay up?

Hello I wonder if you can help please...As the registered keeper of the car I received a parking charge telling me the driver of the car had not paid for parking and had spent 13 mins in the car park before leaving.  I appealed the parking charge to Smart Parking on the grounds that the parking charge notice arrived late so is not enforceable against me under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (“PoFA”)  .  This has been rejected. I have not named the driver.I now want to appeal to the IAS but want to check if I'm in my rights.....The facts are these:• Date of alleged contravention:  01.08.2025• According to Smart Parking the registered keeper details were received: 11.08.2025,• Date printed on NtK:  11.08.2025,• Date the parking charge arrived at the registered keepers home: 18. 08. 2025As the letter did not have a stamp showing when it was sent or a postage mark its impossible to tell if it was sent on the 11th of August and took 7 days to arrive (unlikely) or if it was in fact sent late.  I was around for the proceeding week so know when it turned up.