3. Failure to clearly display a valid permit - Met Parking Services
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3

Author Topic: Failure to clearly display a valid permit - Met Parking Services  (Read 1446 times)

0 Members and 88 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Failure to clearly display a valid permit - Met Parking Services
« Reply #15 on: »
Quote from: DWMB2 on March 17, 2025, 11:05:19 am
Quote from: billybob47 on March 17, 2025, 11:01:54 am
Apologies if the quality is a bit bad - the file size was too large.


For future reference - there's a guide to uploading using a third party here: READ THIS FIRST - Private Parking Charges Forum guide

Ah I had no idea you could use imgur on here! Will do next time - much easier :)
Logged
collecting tickets like pokemon, gotta catch them all
Re: Failure to clearly display a valid permit - Met Parking Services
« Reply #16 on: »
That Notice to Keeper has been issued far too late to be compliant with Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA), so they cannot hold you liable. The back of the notice suggests you can appeal, so I suggest doing so online with the below:

Dear Sirs,

I have received your Parking Charge Notice (Ref: ________) for vehicle registration mark ____ ___, in which you allege that the driver has incurred a parking charge. I note from your correspondence that you are not seeking to hold me liable as the registered keeper, under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ("The Act"). You have chosen not to issue a Notice to Keeper in accordance with The Act, and it is now too late for you to do so.

There is no obligation for me to name the driver and I will not be doing so. I am therefore unable to help you further with this matter, and look forward to your confirmation that the charge has been cancelled. If you choose to decline this appeal, you must issue a POPLA code.

Yours,


If appealing online, be careful there are no drop down/tick boxes that cause you to identify who was driving, and keep a close eye on your spam folder for their response. If they do not respond within 28 days, chase them.
Logged
Agree Agree x 1 View List
Re: Failure to clearly display a valid permit - Met Parking Services
« Reply #17 on: »
I'm sorry but I cannot read the detail in that image you have posted. Please repost a readable copy, preferably using one. of the methods linked to, mentioned in the post above.

However, any NtK issued for this PCN before the 30th December 2024 or after 27th January 2025 is not PoFA compliant.

When I have seen the actual wording of the NtK, I will provide a suitable response.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2025, 02:43:11 pm by b789 »
Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Re: Failure to clearly display a valid permit - Met Parking Services
« Reply #18 on: »
b789, I was (just about*) able to read the wording - they stop short of falsely claiming PoFA compliance, so they're well-aware they can't rely on it. Accordingly the suggested appeal above should either do the trick, or elicit a POPLA code, where my money would be on them withdrawing once an appeal goes in.

*OP, an imgur version would be helpful.
Logged
Re: Failure to clearly display a valid permit - Met Parking Services
« Reply #19 on: »
Sorry about that guys - here is a clearer version of the NTK

https://imgur.com/a/zJNMKjG

No idea why the image is sideways lol. Showing as portrait here. How annoying.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2025, 01:57:09 pm by billybob47 »
Logged
collecting tickets like pokemon, gotta catch them all
Re: Failure to clearly display a valid permit - Met Parking Services
« Reply #20 on: »
Appeal has been submitted, I'll reply with their response (which, judging by their previous response times, will be in July) ;D
Logged
collecting tickets like pokemon, gotta catch them all
Re: Failure to clearly display a valid permit - Met Parking Services
« Reply #21 on: »
If you haven't heard back within 28 days then chase them, don't wait for them.
Logged
Agree Agree x 1 View List
Re: Failure to clearly display a valid permit - Met Parking Services
« Reply #22 on: »
In an interesting turn of events, MET have replied pretty promptly.


The reply looks like they read nothing of what was said though.


I've been issued a POPLA code, can anyone help with the appeal?


[ Guests cannot view attachments ]
Logged
collecting tickets like pokemon, gotta catch them all
Re: Failure to clearly display a valid permit - Met Parking Services
« Reply #23 on: »
Just to a search on the forum for other POPLA appeals to get an idea how to put one together. POPLA will only consider breaches of law or the PPSCoP. They do not take any mitigation into account.

When you've had a search, try and put something together yourself and then show it to us. We can them advise on any corrections etc. Do not just throw something together and sending it without showing us first.
Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Re: Failure to clearly display a valid permit - Met Parking Services
« Reply #24 on: »
Sounds fair, will do shortly.

Will they consider the breach of POFA or does that count as mitigation?
Logged
collecting tickets like pokemon, gotta catch them all
Re: Failure to clearly display a valid permit - Met Parking Services
« Reply #25 on: »
Here's a starter for ten... Because of the way paragraph 8 of PoFA is worded the wording of any subsequent POPLA appeal always ends up being a little convoluted, but I've tried to make the point as clear as possible:

No rush to submit so there may be other comments.

Quote
POPLA Appeal
[NAME] (Registered Keeper) (Appellant)
-Vs-
MET Parking Services Ltd (Operator)
Vehicle Registration Mark:[VRM]
 POPLA Reference Code: [POPLA REFERENCE]
 Parking Charge Notice Number: [PCN REFERENCE]

Case Overview:
I, the registered keeper (“I”/“the Appellant”) of the above vehicle (VRM: _______), received a parking charge notice via post from MET Parking Services (“the Operator”), which purported to be a Notice to Keeper, following the affixing of a Notice to Driver to the vehicle windscreen. Following receipt of the supposed Notice to Keeper, I appealed to the Operator, who acknowledged and subsequently rejected my appeal. It is my position that as the registered keeper of the vehicle I have no liability for the parking charge, and that my appeal should therefore be upheld. My appeal is on the following grounds:

1. No keeper liability: the Parking Charge Notice does not comply with the requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act (“PoFA”/“the Act”):
The operator does not not know the identity of the driver and is therefore seeking to recover the charge from me, the registered keeper of the vehicle. In order to be able to recover any unpaid charges from me as the registered keeper, the operator must comply with the requirements outlined in Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. MET Parking Services have failed to do so.

Paragraph 8 of PoFA sets out the requirements that must be met for an operator to recover unpaid charges from the registered keeper of a vehicle, in cases where a Notice to Keeper is issued following the issuing of a Notice to Driver. Paragraph 8(4) states that:

(4)The notice [to keeper] must be given by—
(a)handing it to the keeper, or leaving it at a current address for service for the keeper, within the relevant period; or
(b)sending it by post to a current address for service for the keeper so that it is delivered to that address within the relevant period.

Paragraph 8(5) defines the "relevant period" as "the period of 28 days following the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to driver was given". As set out below, MET Parking have failed to deliver a Notice to Keeper within the relevant period defined by paragraph 8(5) of PoFA.

Date Notice to Driver was 'given': 02/12/2024
Final day of the "relevant period" of 28 days following the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to driver was given: 24/01/2025
Date of issue of Notice to Keeper: 06/03/2025
Date of presumed service (2 working days after issue, as per 8(6) of the Act): 10/03/2024

As is clear from the dates outlined above, the Notice to Keeper was given 45 days after the end of the relevant period of 28 days following the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to driver was given, as defined by paragraph 8(5) of PoFA. MET Parking Services are therefore unable to rely on the provisions of PoFA to hold me liable as the keeper. Accordingly, as there is no evidence as to who was driving, I cannot be held liable for the charge, and my appeal should be upheld.

For the reasons outlined above, it is clear that as the registered keeper I have no liability for this charge, and I request that my appeal is upheld.
Logged
Agree Agree x 1 View List
Re: Failure to clearly display a valid permit - Met Parking Services
« Reply #26 on: »
Alright, I've copied that in and filled in my vehicle details.
Should I send it off?
It looks exactly the same bar personal informaiton so I'm not sure there's a need to paste it here.
Logged
collecting tickets like pokemon, gotta catch them all
Re: Failure to clearly display a valid permit - Met Parking Services
« Reply #27 on: »
Yes - on the POPLA portal, use 'other' for reason for appeal. You're appealing as the registered keeper only.

You can upload it as a PDF onto their portal.
Logged
Re: Failure to clearly display a valid permit - Met Parking Services
« Reply #28 on: »
Awesome, thank you very much.

About to send this off - do I need to attach images of the NTK's too? or just this appeal only?

Sorry for my incessant questions, I just need to make sure I get this right.
Logged
collecting tickets like pokemon, gotta catch them all
Re: Failure to clearly display a valid permit - Met Parking Services
« Reply #29 on: »
No need - if MET challenge your appeal they'll produce an evidence pack which will contain the notices.

If I were a betting man I'd wager that they'll save themselves the POPLA fee and withdraw, but you never know.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3
« previous next »
  3. Failure to clearly display a valid permit - Met Parking Services