-
Hi,
Any grounds of appeal for the following?
'Charge has been issued as you either did not validate your parking through the parking terminals, or we do not have evidence of a sufficient payment to cover full duration'
https://ibb.co/ZT7RT8q
https://ibb.co/Qf1mJff
Location :
https://www.google.com/maps/@52.5213892,-1.9903237,3a,75y,333.5h,87.77t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sRIKXZ-10WVEkIaandx4ycQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DRIKXZ-10WVEkIaandx4ycQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D4.0546145%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
Thanks -
-
You will note that on the NtK it says the the charge is given to you under paragraph 9(2)(f) of PoFA and is subject to them complying with the applicable conditions under Schedule 4 of the Act. Whilst it is unlikely that the operator will cancel the PCN for the following reason, POPLA have and should cancel it, as long as you only appeal as the keeper. Do not identify the driver or dob yourself in it by saying things like "I drove...".
They have failed to fully comply with the strict requirements of PoFA by omitting the following element of paragraph 9(2)(e)(i).QuoteA notice which is to be relied on as a notice to keeper for the purposes of paragraph 6(1)(b) is given in accordance with this paragraph if the following requirements are met.
The notice must - state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper — to pay the unpaid parking charges.
Read it for yourself here:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4/enacted
By having failed to fully comply with the requirements of PoFA, they cannot hold the keeper liable. Only the driver is liable and they have no idea who is the driver unless the keeper admits to having driven or provides the actual drivers details (throw the real driver under the bus). -
-
'Charge has been issued as you either did not validate your parking through the parking terminals'
This language is designed to entrap, clearly 'you' here is the keeper and it was the driver who failed to do as alleged. -
-
You will note that on the NtK it says the the charge is given to you under paragraph 9(2)(f) of PoFA and is subject to them complying with the applicable conditions under Schedule 4 of the Act. Whilst it is unlikely that the operator will cancel the PCN for the following reason, POPLA have and should cancel it, as long as you only appeal as the keeper. Do not identify the driver or dob yourself in it by saying things like "I drove...".
They have failed to fully comply with the strict requirements of PoFA by omitting the following element of paragraph 9(2)(e)(i).QuoteA notice which is to be relied on as a notice to keeper for the purposes of paragraph 6(1)(b) is given in accordance with this paragraph if the following requirements are met.
The notice must - state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper — to pay the unpaid parking charges.
Read it for yourself here:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4/enacted
By having failed to fully comply with the requirements of PoFA, they cannot hold the keeper liable. Only the driver is liable and they have no idea who is the driver unless the keeper admits to having driven or provides the actual drivers details (throw the real driver under the bus).
Draft:
To whom it may concern,
I challenge this PCN on the basis that on the NtK it says it is given to me under paragraph 9(2)(f) of PoFA and is subject to them complying with the applicable conditions under Schedule 4 of the Act. You have failed to fully comply with the strict requirements of PoFA by omitting the following element of paragraph 9(2)(e)(i).
Shall I send this draft through? -
-
No. That is not worded appropriately. Additionally, you have not included a question about the ambiguity of their reasonable cause of action. What evidence do they have that the driver didn't validate a parking session through the parking terminals, or why they cannot evidence a payment to cover full duration of a parking session. Is it one or the other?
You should start the appeal stating that you are appealing as the keeper:
1. I appeal as keeper. I am under no legal obligation to identify the driver and I decline to do so.
2. You have purported to invoke the statutory procedure for keeper liability under Schedule 4 to the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA). However, you have failed to comply with the strict requirements of PoFA paragraph 9(2)(e)(i) which states:QuoteA notice which is to be relied on as a notice to keeper for the purposes of paragraph 6(1)(b) is given in accordance with this paragraph if the following requirements are met:
The notice must - state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper — to pay the unpaid parking charges.
3. As there is no legal presumption that the keeper of a vehicle was its driver (as opposed, for example, to being a passenger) on any particular occasion, GroupNexus is unable to pursue me as driver.
4. GroupNexus have not evidenced any reasonable cause for requesting the keepers data from the DVLA. An ambiguous allegation that the driver did not validate a parking session through the parking terminals or why GroupNexus cannot evidence a payment to cover full duration of a parking session does not satisfy the criteria for a reasonable cause of action according to the KADOE rules. I will be making a complaint to the DVLA about this.
5. Furthermore, GroupNexus has failed to including evidence of the signage that is purported to have given rise to a contract by conduct. Neither has GroupNexus shown that it has landowner authority to issue PCNs in its own name.
6. The inadequate signage and lack of evidence of landowner authority evidence shows that GroupNexus have failed to adequately prove that the driver is liable. As the keeper, I reserve the right to expand on these points at POPLA should GroupNexus fail to cancel this PCN. -
-
I have received a Parking charge reminder but no reply to the appeal..
-
-
Any recommendations on what to do regarding this?
-
-
Have you chased them as to why they haven't responded to your appeal but have issued reminders?
-
-
How and when did you send your appeal?
-
-
I have received a Parking charge reminder but no reply to the appeal..
Did you appeal online or by post?
If online they will usually email the response and those have a habit of going to spam folders. -
-
Here is the reply from them.. was in my spam without noticing
Dear Sir/Madam,
Thank you for your correspondence relating to your Parking Charge.
The Charge was issued and the signage is displayed in compliance with The British Parking Association’s Approved Operator Scheme Code of Practice and all relevant laws and regulations.
Clear signs at the entrance of this site and throughout inform drivers of the need to pay for parking, and it is not possible to access any part of the premises without passing multiple signs. Your representations are not considered a mitigating circumstance for appeal.
We confirm the Charge was issued under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. As no driver details have been provided, we are holding the registered keeper of the vehicle liable.
In light of this, on this occasion, your representations have been carefully considered and rejected.
We can confirm that we will hold the Charge at the current rate of Ł40.00 for a further 14 days from the date of this correspondence. If no payment is received within this period, and no further appeal to POPLA is made, the Charge will escalate and further costs may be added. -
-
So, what was the date of their rejection of your appeal? Does it contain your POPLA code? Whilst it gives you 28 days to respond, you actually have 32 days. Are you in time to make your POPLA appeal?
You never showed us what you wrote in your appeal. Have they rebutted every point you raised? -
-
So, what was the date of their rejection of your appeal? Does it contain your POPLA code? Whilst it gives you 28 days to respond, you actually have 32 days. Are you in time to make your POPLA appeal?
You never showed us what you wrote in your appeal. Have they rebutted every point you raised?
I had appealed the above as advised by b789.
It includes the POPLA code and the date of the email is 26/03 which means its been 39 days since the day
-
-
No. That is not worded appropriately. Additionally, you have not included a question about the ambiguity of their reasonable cause of action. What evidence do they have that the driver didn't validate a parking session through the parking terminals, or why they cannot evidence a payment to cover full duration of a parking session. Is it one or the other?
You should start the appeal stating that you are appealing as the keeper:
1. I appeal as keeper. I am under no legal obligation to identify the driver and I decline to do so.
2. You have purported to invoke the statutory procedure for keeper liability under Schedule 4 to the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA). However, you have failed to comply with the strict requirements of PoFA paragraph 9(2)(e)(i) which states:QuoteA notice which is to be relied on as a notice to keeper for the purposes of paragraph 6(1)(b) is given in accordance with this paragraph if the following requirements are met:
The notice must - state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper — to pay the unpaid parking charges.
3. As there is no legal presumption that the keeper of a vehicle was its driver (as opposed, for example, to being a passenger) on any particular occasion, GroupNexus is unable to pursue me as driver.
4. GroupNexus have not evidenced any reasonable cause for requesting the keepers data from the DVLA. An ambiguous allegation that the driver did not validate a parking session through the parking terminals or why GroupNexus cannot evidence a payment to cover full duration of a parking session does not satisfy the criteria for a reasonable cause of action according to the KADOE rules. I will be making a complaint to the DVLA about this.
5. Furthermore, GroupNexus has failed to including evidence of the signage that is purported to have given rise to a contract by conduct. Neither has GroupNexus shown that it has landowner authority to issue PCNs in its own name.
6. The inadequate signage and lack of evidence of landowner authority evidence shows that GroupNexus have failed to adequately prove that the driver is liable. As the keeper, I reserve the right to expand on these points at POPLA should GroupNexus fail to cancel this PCN.
This was the appeal that had been made -
-
Well, it’s too late to appeal to POPLA. You would have been able to raise all the points at POPLA and they would have to answer each one. If they failed to answer or rebut each and every point, you would have likely won.
You are now in a “limbo” phase. You are going to receive debt collector letters which you can safely ignore. They are solely used to try and intimidate you into paying up. They use scary words like “bailiff” and “CCJ” but are powerless to do anything.
What you are waiting to find out is if/when GroupNexus decide to issue a Letter of Claim. Should they do that, come back and you’ll get further advice. We don’t neeed to know about debt collector demands. Ignore those.
If you change address any time in the next 6 years, make sure you instruct the DPO at GroupNexus to rectify your address for service and to erase your old address. -
Like x 1
View List
Agree x 1
View List
Love x 1
View List
Like x 1
View List