Free Traffic Legal Advice

Wow, apologies to all. I thought I was being prudent erring on the side of caution.

I just assumed that it would be best to redact anything that could be linked to the open case.

This is my first time doing this. I can assure you I am not a conspiracy theorist or have perverted fantasies()

But, easily fixed (see below).

So, if this is a NtK not NtH then, given I received it only this morning, am I meant to be waiting longer for a NtH?

Update: I submitted a complaint to the landowner, Moto Services Ltd., using a successful template I found here on the board.

This was the response I got (literally a few hours later):

Is that notice you received addressed to you or is it just a copy of the NtK sent to Hertz? If it is addressed to you, then it is GroupNexus incompetence and as long as the driver is not identified, they have no lawful way to hold you liable as the Hirer.

So, if that notice is addressed to you then you can appeal, only as the Hirer with the following:

I am the hirer of the vehicle and I dispute your Parking Charge. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client, Moto Blyth.

What you have sent me is not a compliant Notice to Hirer (NtH) under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. It is plainly just a copy of the Notice to Keeper previously sent to Hertz, re-addressed to me and still purporting to rely on paragraph 9. That is not how liability is transferred to a Hirer.

You have failed to comply with the strict requirements of PoFA Schedule 4 paragraphs 13 and 14. As your NtH does not fully comply with ALL the requirements of PoFA 2012, you are unable to hold the Hirer 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. GroupNexus has relied on contract law allegations of breach against the driver only.

The Hirer cannot be presumed or inferred to have been the driver, nor pursued under some twisted interpretation of the law of agency. Your NtH can only hold the driver liable. GroupNexus have no hope at POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of time and cancel the PCN

No initial appeal is ever successful and there is no need to go into greater detail at this stage. All you need from them is the POPLA code which will be valid for 33 days from the date they reject the appeal.

I've received a reply from GroupNexus (who are still signing off as CP Plus Ltd).

It's almost like... they didn't read my email—which very explicitly stated I would not be supplying any names.

They are giving me 14 days. Will they automatically reject the appeal after that and provide the POPLA code?

Dear Sir/Madam,

Thank you for your correspondence relating to your Parking Charge.

The representations stated in your correspondence have been noted and considered. Please forward to us the full name and address of the driver at the time this charge was incurred so that we can update our records accordingly.

We are placing this Charge on hold for 14 days from the date of this email to allow you to provide the details requested.

Yours faithfully,

CP Plus Ltd

I'd respond with the following:

Dear CP Plus / GroupNexus,

Thank you for your template request that I “forward the full name and address of the driver”. The fact that you sent this at all confirms that nobody at your organisation has actually read – let alone understood – my appeal or Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.

To spell it out in simple words of one syllable, where possible: you did not send a compliant Notice to Hirer. You simply re-addressed the original Notice to Keeper to me, still waffling on about paragraph 9, and failed to comply with the strict requirements of paragraphs 13 and 14, including the provision of the prescribed hire documents and a proper statement of liability. That is fatal to any attempt to transfer liability from the unknown driver to me as hirer/keeper.

In law, therefore:

- You have no Hirer liability;
- I have no obligation whatsoever to name the driver; and
- Your “14 days on hold” is as meaningless as the rest of your boilerplate.

I decline your invitation to assist you in pursuing a claim you have no legal basis to enforce. You already have my position. You are now put to strict choice:

- Cancel the Parking Charge; or
- Treat this as a reference to the answer given in Arkell v Pressdram (1971) and act accordingly.

There will be no further correspondence on this nonsense unless it contains either a cancellation or a POPLA code.

Yours faithfully,

[Name]
Hirer of the vehicle

Somebody has put a quid in GroupNexus because their responses are flying out. Here's the latest response to my previous email which includes a POPLA code. I will look up next steps/templates, but assuming I now start the appeal with POPLA?

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 requirement to pay for parking in excess of the free 2 hour period, 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 £60 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.

Please find below the payment options: [Payment details]

----------

You have now reached the end of our internal appeals procedure. This correspondence represents our final stance on the matter and we will therefore not enter into any further correspondence.

CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED FOLLOWING THE REJECTION OF AN APPEAL WILL NOT CHANGE THE OUTCOME OR EXTEND THE DATE IN WHICH PAYMENT SHOULD BE MADE.

Although we have now rejected your appeal, you may still have recourse to appeal to Parking On Private Land Appeals (POPLA), an independent appeals service. An appeal to POPLA must be made within 28 days of the date of this correspondence.  POPLA will only consider cases on the grounds that the Parking Charge exceeded the appropriate amount, that the vehicle was not improperly parked or had been stolen, or that you were otherwise not liable for the Parking Charge.  To appeal to POPLA, please go to their website http://www.popla.co.uk and follow the instructions. If you would rather deal with this matter by post, please contact our Appeals Office and we will send you the necessary paperwork.

Your POPLA reference number is: [Reference number]

Please note that if your appeal does not relate to the above criteria or is rejected by POPLA for any reason, you will no longer qualify for payment at the reduced rate. POPLA will not consider any cases where payment has been made. You must pay the charge or appeal to POPLA, you cannot do both.

By law we are also required to inform you that Ombudsman Services (www.ombudsman-services.org/) provides an alternative dispute resolution service that would be competent to deal with your appeal.  However, we have not chosen to participate in their alternative dispute resolution service.  As such should you wish to appeal then you must do so to POPLA, as explained above.

Yours faithfully,
CP Plus  Ltd

You have 33 days from the appeal rejection date to submit your POPLA appeal, so no rush.