Alight amendment to highlight the delay / issue:
Dear Sirs,
I received the Parking Charge Notice (Ref: xxxxxxx) for vehicle registration mark xxxx xxxx in which CarParkingPartnership (CPP) alleges that the driver has incurred a parking charge.
However, as already stated in my appeal to CPP which they rejected without comment, the operator, CPP, failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. The notice was dated May 4th which was 17 days after the alleged parking charge was due and then there were the additional 3 days before the notice was delivered which is a total of 20 days.
As a result, keeper liability does not arise.
In particular:
The Notice to Keeper was not served within the statutory timeframe required under Paragraph 9(4) of Schedule 4; and
The Notice to Keeper fails to include the mandatory wording required under Schedule 4.
Where strict compliance with Schedule 4 is absent, the operator cannot transfer liability from the driver to the registered keeper.
As you can see above, the notice could not possibly have been served in compliance with Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. As the operator has not identified the driver, and I am appealing as the registered keeper, the appeal should be allowed.
Yours,
xxxxxxxx