-
Hi, a driver(gym member) uses a household members car, only this one time forgets to input reg on gym console, has used the same car/gym many times. Received this ntk, have not responded yet.
Approached the gym who advised to appeal in the first instance, then they might help. -
-
Please post up the PCN, both sides.
Redact personal info. -
-
-
<a href="https://www.imagebam.com/view/ME1AVIPS" target="_blank"><img src="https://thumbs4.imagebam.com/87/a0/9a/ME1AVIPS_t.jpg" alt="IMG_20260223_154250.jpg"/></a>
-
-
-
So the NtK is not PoFA compliant.
The Keeper needs to respond along the lines of;
I am the registered keeper.
As your notice is not PoFA compliant I will not be accepting any liability for the outstanding parking charges.
The driver is not known to you and I will not be providing any driver details.
Your options are;
Cancel the notice
OR
Waste further money by providing a POPLA code.
Many thanks,
xxxxxx xxxxxxxx -
-
Thanks for the quick reply, so I don't need to mention the driver is a gym member and there has been no loss to the gym as no payment is needed (only need to enter reg when u visit)?
Also what happens if they give a popla code?
Out of curiosity- why don't they make there paperwork poFa compliant?
Many thanks -
-
I'm struggling to see why the NTK is not POFA compliant. If InterCity125 is suggesting the wording isn't exactly what's in the legislation Group Nexus won't agree and it's unlikely POPLA will either. You may eventually get a judge to agree but that's a long way off.
there has been no loss to the gym as no payment is needed (only need to enter reg when u visit)?
That's not how this works, the driver entered into a contract with Group Nexus, they are alleging the driver didn't adhere to the rules for the car park, I.e. register, so under the contract the driver now owes Group Nexus. As GN don't know who the driver is and they are relying on POFA and will hold the registered keeper liable. You have four options.
1. Pay the PCN, on the face of it the driver did breach the car park rules.
2. Get the gym to cancel it, usually the prefered option known as plan A. Depends on what sway they have with GN.
3. Appeal on the basis the driver was a gym member but forgot to register, theres an outside chance this will get the PCN cancelled or reduced to £20 (the driver has cost GN real money to issue the PCN).
4. Use the appeal above which will almost definitely get rejected*
A POPLA code allows you to go to the 'independant' appeals service, the next stage in the process.
*This root will most likely go to POPLA next, followed by debt collectors letters followed by threats of court followed by a letter of claim. It's a long winded process if you can be bothered but you will need to engage with the legal process if it gets that far. If you do they normally give up just before they have to pay the court fee. If you don't engage at worst you risk a CCJ in default which will wreck your credit score for 7 years. -
-
Hi yes I just read jammys recent post at this same location(long winded attempt imo!) and note popla rejected his appeal and upheld that the PCN was poFa compliant?
So I'm thinking I'll appeal with proof that the driver is a gym member.
I'm surprised the same advice is being given for a number of years from what I have read, to claim poFa non compliance because surely even if they weren't before they would be by now?! -
-
The NTK not being POFA compliant may be valid but it's highly unlikely to win any appeals. It really needs to be argued in court and even that wouldn't necessarily clear the issue up for anything other than the claim in question.
It's an avenue to take when appealing if no better grounds exist but it would be helpful to people appealing if it wasn't portrayed in such certain terms as the validity of the argument is very much any opinion, not a legal fact and as you point out if the PCNs aren't POFA compliant why the parking companies don't make the relatively trivial changes to the wording eludes me. Some parking companies are pretty amateur but the bigger ones generally know what they are doing. -
-
I'm struggling to see why the NTK is not POFA compliant.
Where's the invitation to the RK to pay the invoice?
That omission makes the NTK defective. -
-
That's an opinion, not a legal certainty and the PPC won't cancel on that basis and nor will a second stage appeal service.
-
-
In order to be compliant the NtK must contain specific text and legal choices as specified by Schedule 4 of PoFA.
In this instance, the requirements of Schedule 4 Paragraph 9(2)(e) are not satisfied by the operators NtK.
To be compliant, the requirements of 9(2)(e) can only be met if a specific paragraph is placed in the NtK which should read as follows;
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At the current time, Group Nexus (the creditor) does not know both the name and a current address for service for the driver.
The keeper is therefore INVITED TO PAY THE UNPAID PARKING CHARGES (Para 9(2)(e)(i) requirement but not present on the Group Nexus NtK)
Or
If the keeper was not the driver of the vehicle, to notify the creditor of the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and to pass this notice onto the driver (Para 9(2)(e)(ii) requirement)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The required paragraph is clearly missing from the operators NtK.
The information must be presented in this manner to be compliant ie in one paragraph. Compliance cannot be achieved by, for example, placing the information at random points throughout the NtK since this would not present the keeper with the legal choice which 9(2)(e) requires.
NtK never states the mandatory wording required by para. 9(2)(e).
NtK never 'invites the keeper to pay the unpaid parking charges'.
NtK never presents the two limbed legal invitation which para. 9(2)(e)(i) and 9(2)(e)(ii) requires.
This probably won't work with the initial appeal but it has a much better chance with POPLA because we can word the POPLA appeal in such a manner as to ask Group Nexus to highlight the missing wording on their NtK. -
-
That's an opinion, not a legal certainty and the PPC won't cancel on that basis and nor will a second stage appeal service.
I agree that both appeals will undoubtedly fail but that's neither here nor there, it's to be expected.
Some breaches of POFA could be argued to be technical in nature - omitting the invitation to the keeper to pay is not.....it's a mandatory element and if it's missing then the NTK is non-compliant and liability cannot be transferred from driver to keeper. -
-
Is it possible to try both approaches i.e ask to cancel due legitimate gym use, or if u don't cancel on that basis then the ntk definitely will(eventually) be thrown out anyway due to non compliance?
-