Hi guys,
Just wondering if I have any chance of contesting this one - I was literally stopped for a few minutes in an estate managed by NPC and got a ticket when I was still in the van, was photographed from the back and time observed was only 1 minute.
Any help gratefully received!
Of course you contest it. No contract could be formed within the consideration period which is a minimum of 5 minutes.
Hi,
Sorry for the delayed response, yes of course have attached the pcn I received through the post. I’ve tried to take screenshots of the signs on Google maps but the quality is too bad. I could go down there and take photos of necessary.
[ Guests cannot view attachments ]
Of course you contest it. No contract could be formed within the consideration period which is a minimum of 5 minutes.
Thanks, I take it this is for private companies as well? Sounds like this could be the route to go down. Pretty cheeky, I didn’t even see the guy
Are you saying that you received a Notice to Driver (NtD) that was affixed to the vehicle while you were actually in it? If so, where is that NtD?
Is this a hired/leased vehicle? Is that Notice in your name?
Were copies of any of the following documents included with the Notice to Hirer (NtH):
(a) a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement;
(b) a copy of the hire agreement;
(c) a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement; and
(d) a copy of the original Notice to Keeper (NtK) that was sent to the hire/lease company.
No, by the looks of things someone crept up behind the van whilst I was sat in it and took those photos. Nothing was attached to the van at the time, the fine came through to the leasing company and then they passed it onto me.
It's a leased vehicle and the notice is in my name, after the leasing company named me as the leasee.
None of those documents were provided, to be totally honest my own personal approach with these fines is if I have a valid reason or technicality I can use that's great, but I'm not so keen to go down the disputed driver route, just my preference.
Sounds like the 5 minute minimum consideration period might be the route to go down, I don't suppose anyone has something that I can cite regarding that rule when I appeal?
The fact that the Notice to Hirer did not comply with the requirements of PoFA 2012 to transfer liability from the unknown driver to you as Hirer. You do not name the driver.
The absence of the documents @b789 mentions dooms their case. They rely on people not knowing this and just paying up.
See
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4 section 14(6) in particular.
You appeal that you are not liable on this basis, they will reject your appeal because they always do, but you either get POPLA to cancel it for you - I can’t work out if they are in the BPA or the IPC - or you wait for them to take you to court and follow our advice if the latter. You won’t pay 1p.
You should edit your first post in line with the READ THIS FIRST to avoid implicitly identifying the driver.
Actually maybe I should clarify that I don't know whether those documents were included to the leasing company from NPC, they definitely weren't forwarded onto me with the ticket.
No, they have to be sent to you, the hirer, along with the Notice to Hirer. Read the legislation if you are unclear. You say they weren’t.
You have nothing to do with the communication between NPC and the registered keeper, because you’re not the registered keeper.
You should edit your first post in line with the READ THIS FIRST to avoid implicitly identifying the driver.
yes good point, can't seem to edit at the moment though
Report to moderator and ask for this to be done for you.
(I seem to have become a Sr. Member but I can’t do anything with your posts like this!)
Bottom line is that NPC, amongst others, can’t be bothered with the hassle of complying with legislation to hold hirers responsible because they know that lots of people in receipt of a defective Notice to Hirer just pay up anyway. They save the expense of complying but receive ££££ anyway. The non-compliant NtH would be enough to have the case thrown out of court if it went that far.
Agree x 1
View List