3. Parking Group Ltd - NTK - Incorrect ?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]

Author Topic: Parking Group Ltd - NTK - Incorrect ?  (Read 345 times)

0 Members and 40 Guests are viewing this topic.

Parking Group Ltd - NTK - Incorrect ?
« on: »
I received this from Parking Group Ltd

The driver pulled into the space to allow two people to get out and drove off.

Vehicle was running and was there less than two minutes.


Under BPA  - they 'operate in accordance with the BPA Approved Operator Scheme Code of Practice ' - isn't a grace period of 10 minutes allowed?

Also, the alleged offence was March 16th and NTK was posted April 1st, 16 days later. Should it be sent within 14 days?

Any advice on how to proceed would be most welcome.

TIA

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]
« Last Edit: April 11, 2025, 10:24:32 am by Fable1506 »
Logged

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook

Re: Parking Group Ltd - NTK - Incorrect ?
« Reply #1 on: »
14 days only applies if they want to hold the registered keeper liable rather than the driver, so you reply along the lines that they can’t hold you, the registered keeper, liable and to take it up with the driver, who you will not be naming.

If they come up with some malarkey about not using PoFA and assuming the keeper to be the driver, you just laugh at them.

They know that lots of people will just pay up, and it looks like you’re not one of them.

In due course they’ll likely reject any appeal but send a POPLA code who will most likely rule in your favour when you appeal to them.
« Last Edit: April 11, 2025, 10:25:30 am by jfollows »
Logged
Re: Parking Group Ltd - NTK - Incorrect ?
« Reply #2 on: »
Easy one to deal with… as long as the unknown drivers identity is not revealed. There is no legal obligation on the known keeper (the recipient of the Notice to Keeper (NtK)) to reveal the identity of the unknown driver and no inference or assumptions can be made.

The NtK is not compliant with all the requirements of PoFA which means that if the unknown driver is not identified, they cannot transfer liability for the charge from the unknown driver to the known keeper.

Use the following as your appeal. No need to embellish or remove anything from it:

Quote
I am the keeper of the vehicle and I dispute your 'parking charge'. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner.

As your Notice to Keeper (NtK) does not fully comply with ALL the requirements of PoFA 2012, you are unable to hold the keeper 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. Parking Group has relied on contract law allegations of breach against the driver only.

The registered keeper cannot be presumed or inferred to have been the driver, nor pursued under some twisted interpretation of the law of agency. Your NtK can only hold the driver liable. Parking Group have no hope at POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.
Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Re: Parking Group Ltd - NTK - Incorrect ?
« Reply #3 on: »


Many thanks.  :)
 
Logged
Pages: [1]
« previous next »
  3. Parking Group Ltd - NTK - Incorrect ?