Free Traffic Legal Advice

! I received Parking Charge Notice to registered keeper from NPC group limited, posted on 02.07.24. I'm attaching a picture of it.
The ground is that All vehicles must hold a valid NPC e-permit. Apparently the driver didn't get one.
The driver parked the car there as he did Amazon deliveries. For this the driver always leaves a notice on the dashboard saying Amazon delivery. And this is slightly seen even from their pictures. The driver has been on this location before and never received a ticket. The driver also stayed there for very short time. The driver can proof he was there for delivery purposes as well. The driver also didn't get a ticket at the location.
There is no barrier on this location, neither machines to get a ticket or permit. There is no information at all where the drivers can get a permit neither.
The location in the letter doesn't show the exact location. This is one of those new neighbourhoods in London and even if you write the post code in Google Maps, it won't shows you exact street. Also checking the signs in Google maps is not reliable in this case because the signs in Google maps are old. The driver went to the location again and took a photo of the signs, as photo of them wasn't provided in the Parking Charge Notice.

As this is part of the delivery job, and the time spent at any location is usually very short, I think there is no need to get permit as he is going to loose more time looking fof how he can get one and then applying for it, rather just drop the parcel and leave, however this is my opinion. Usually on those types of locations there is 20 minutes free period exactly for those type of jobs. Or visitor bays, or huge clear messages where you can get a permit from. Where should the driver can park when there is clear signs no parking on the yellow lines, according to the driver.

As a registered keeper I received Parking Charge Notice which I appealed, and my appeal was rejected.

I will write down the grounds in my appeal (I copied them before I sent the appeal as I don't have access to them after that).
"The Notice of the Keeper is invalid for the following reasons:
There is no information in the letter saying it is issued under PoFA 2012.
There is no information for how long the vehicle was parked.
There is no information if the pictures are collected by CCTV or parking attendant.
The location is not accurate as it doesn't include the exact name and number of the street. Only the name and the post code of the neighbourhood, which is quite big.
No proper observation can be done in 53 seconds (according to the letter).
In addition to this:
No pictures of the front of the car has been taken where it was displayed notice for Amazon delivery.
No picture of the exact current parking terms is provided in evidences as well.
You breach the GDPR by including the other vehicle registration number in one of the evidence pictures of my case." At the end I asked ticket to be cancelled.

I will upload a pdf file of the rejection.
Screenshot of the location according to Google maps when I write the post code provided in the letter

Now I only can appeal to IAS but I'm not sure I can do it well.

You are dealing with a firm of ex-clamper thugs who are members of the ICP. No matter what you put in your appeal would have been rejected. Nothing new there.

Personally, I don't advocate appealing to the IAS as it is a kangaroo court and you have almost zero chance of winning an appeal there either. Others may disagree.

You are now in a state of limbo. Should NPC try and take this all the way to court, you have a very good defence in Jopson v Homeguard [2016] which is a persuasive appeal case where the judge defined that stopping for a short period to load or unload is not parking.

The images show that they were taken by an operative, not ANPR. The sign appears to be hidden behind a tee or a bush. There are flaws in the NtK that breach the new joint Code of Practice (CoP) that can be used against them too.

If you feel that you want to waste your time on an IAS appeal, you should use the new joint CoP to see where they have breached their own rules, especially the 21 day restriction on appealing to the IAS.

Once that is rejected, you will receive a load of debt collector letters which you can safely ignore. They are powerless to do anything, no matter what they say. We don't need to see them.

At some point, they may/will issue a letter of claim and then a claim itself. That is good because then you can have a truly independent arbiter, a judge, decide whether the keeper owes NPC a debt or not.

Here is some more pictures from their website.
https://i.imgur.com/Oqk33Z8.jpeg
https://i.imgur.com/8CWZxU4.jpeg
https://i.imgur.com/vcYULYB.jpeg

They're fairly likely to still be waiting In limbo to see if the parking company litigate.

For advice on your case please start a separate thread.

today I received a letter that they sent me to the court.

Please show us this letter.

There is a few more pages. Do you want them too?

With an issue date of 11th March, you have until 4pm on Monday 31st March to submit your defence. If you submit an Acknowledgement of Service (AoS) before then, you would then have until 4pm on Monday 14th April to submit your defence.

If you want to submit an AoS then follow the instructions in this linked PDF:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/xvqu3bask5m0zir/money-claim-online-How-to-Acknowledge.pdf?dl=0

Here is the defence and link to the draft order that goes with it. You only need to edit your name and the claim number. You sign the defence by typing your full name for the signature and date it. There is nothing to edit in the draft order.

When you're ready you combine both documents as a single PDF attachment and send as an attachment in an email to claimresponses.cnbc@justice.gov.uk and CC in yourself. The claim number must be in the email subject field and in the body of the email just put: "Please find attached the defence and draft order in the matter of National Parking Control Group Ltd v [your full name] Claim no.: [claim number]."

IN THE COUNTY COURT

Claim No: [Claim Number]

BETWEEN:

National Parking Control Group Ltd
Claimant

- and -

[Defendant's Full Name]

Defendant

---

DEFENCE

1. The Defendant denies the claim in its entirety. The Defendant asserts that there is no liability to the Claimant and that no debt is owed. The claim is without merit and does not adequately disclose any comprehensible cause of action.

2. There is a lack of precise detail in the Particulars of Claim (PoC) in respect of the factual and legal allegations made against the Defendant such that the PoC do not comply with CPR 16.4.

3. The Defendant is unable to plead properly to the PoC because:

(a) The contract referred to is not detailed or attached to the PoC in accordance with CPR PD 16(7.5);

(b) The PoC do not state the exact wording of the clause (or clauses) of the terms and conditions of the contract (or contracts) which is/are relied on;

(c) The PoC do not adequately set out the reason (or reasons) why the claimant asserts the defendant has breached the contract (or contracts)

(d) The PoC do not state with sufficient particularity exactly where the breach occurred, the exact time when the breach occurred and how long it is alleged that the vehicle was parked before the parking charge was allegedly incurred;

(e) The PoC do not state precisely how the sum claimed is calculated, including the basis for any statutory interest, damages, or other charges;

(f) The PoC do not state what proportion of the claim is the parking charge and what proportion is damages;

(g) The PoC do not provide clarity on whether the Defendant is sued as the driver or the keeper of the vehicle, as the claimant cannot plead alternative causes of action without specificity.

4. The Defendant attaches to this defence a copy of a draft order approved by a district judge at another court. The court struck out the claim of its own initiative after determining that the Particulars of Claim failed to comply with CPR 16.4. The judge noted that the claimant had failed to:

(i) Set out the exact wording of the clause (or clauses) of the terms and conditions relied upon;

(ii) Adequately explain the reasons why the defendant was allegedly in breach of contract;

(iii) Provide separate, detailed Particulars of Claim as permitted under CPR PD 7C.5.2(2).

(iv) The court further observed that, given the modest sum claimed, requiring further case management steps would be disproportionate and contrary to the overriding objective. Accordingly, the judge struck out the claim outright rather
than permitting an amendment.

5. The Defendant submits that the same reasoning applies in this case and invites the court to adopt a similar approach by striking out the claim for the Claimant’s failure to comply with CPR 16.4.

Statement of truth

I believe that the facts stated in this Defence are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

Signed:


Date:

Draft Order for the defence

As I mentioned, the odds of this actually making it all the way to a hearing where you'd have to speak in court is less than 1%. For now, just follow the advice I have given you above.