Author Topic: PCN - CUP Enforcement - 6 months late NtK  (Read 4304 times)

0 Members and 143 Guests are viewing this topic.

PCN - CUP Enforcement - 6 months late NtK
« on: »
Hi,

Wonder if you can help me on next step please.

I recently received a PCN dated 01/04/2025 for a contravention which occurred 06/10/2024. A reminder was sent again on 14/05/2025.



I sent an email to CUP the below email which I got from a similar topic on this forum ....
Apparently the case has been passed to the debt recovery. IS there any chance i can submit an appeal to the POPLA?

************************************
Email to CUP enformcement
 
I am the registered keeper of the vehicle, though I dispute your alleged ‘parking charge’.
 
I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a complaint about your predatory and incompetent conduct to your client landowner.

Your Notice to Keeper (NtK) does not fully comply with all the mandatory requirements set out in Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA).
 
It would appear that CUP Enforcement has failed to grasp that PoFA compliance is not a "close enough" exercise. Partial or even substantial compliance does not suffice.

The timeline of the alleged offence:

Date of alleged contravention: Sunday, 6th of October 2024
Date of NtK issue: Tuesday, 1st of April January 2025
First date of presumed delivery: Thursday, 3rd of April 2025

For your NtK to be PoFA-compliant, it should have been issued by Wednesday, 20th of October 2024, at the latest. Clearly, it was not.

I remind you that liability under PoFA is strictly limited to the driver unless the NtK is served within the relevant period and in full compliance with the statutory provisions. As your NtK fails this threshold, you are unable to hold me, the registered keeper, liable.

There is no legal obligation on the keeper to identify the driver to an unregulated private parking company. There will be no admission as to who was driving. No assumptions or inferences can be drawn. The registered keeper cannot be presumed or inferred to have been the driver, nor pursued under incorrect interpretation of the law of agency.

I note your NtK. I refer you to the answer given in the case of Arkell v. Pressdram (1971).
 
In that spirit, I suggest you cancel this PCN as it fails to comply with the required law. There is minimal chance of this PCN passing legal muster  when the facts are heard at a future complaint/appeal (at POPLA). It would be prudent on CUP to minimise costs incurred when the outcome is most likely to be negative due to reasons stated above.

I look forward to confirmation that this matter is now closed.


*********************************************************

CUP where quite prompt with the reply...

here is there reply....

Thank you for your email regarding Parking Charge Notice 41814.

Please be advised that motorists are required to submit an appeal within 28 days of receiving the Notice to Keeper. As this deadline has now passed, the opportunity to appeal has been forfeited.

Regarding your query about the timing of PCN 41814, please note that the British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Practice sets out the standards that all accredited parking operators must follow. Specifically, Section 22.8 states:

“While we have an expectation that operators will seek to use PoFA legislation, it is appreciated that there will be occasions where this might not be possible. If a Non-PoFA Notice to Keeper is being issued, it must be sent out as soon as possible and no later than 7 months after the original parking event.”

We can confirm that the notice in question was issued within the allowable time frame in accordance with this guidance.

As such, the case has now been passed to debt recovery, and CUP Enforcement is no longer the creditor. Any further correspondence should be directed to the recovery agency currently handling the case.

Best Wishes,
CUP Administration


CUP EnforcementProtection| Parking Enforcement| Security
W: | www.cupenforcement.com
T: 0844-856-4508
E: info@cupenforcement.com
*************************************************************************************


[ Guests cannot view attachments ] [ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook


Re: PCN - CUP Enforcement - 6 months late NtK
« Reply #1 on: »
Wonder if you can help me on next step please.
There is none really.  Wait and see if they issue a court claim.

IS there any chance i can submit an appeal to the POPLA?
Not now.  You have to appeal to the parking company and they have to give a POPLA code upon rejection.  I presume you 'ignored' the first notice?

I note your NtK. I refer you to the answer given in the case of Arkell v. Pressdram (1971).
Yeah, it's funny but could be shown to a Judge.

As such, the case has now been passed to debt recovery, and CUP Enforcement is no longer the creditor.
However, this is gold dust.

They have just confirmed that they can no longer sue you as they have apparently 'sold' the debt... They've skewed themselves on Morton's Fork!

Worthy of a complaint to the DVLA as it appears to be in breach of KADOE.

(They are still the creditor even at debt collection)
« Last Edit: May 29, 2025, 05:53:32 pm by JustLoveCars »

Re: PCN - CUP Enforcement - 6 months late NtK
« Reply #2 on: »
Ignore all debt recovery letters. They cannot just “sell” the alleged debt to a third party without certain legal obligations, which they have not complied with.

They have admitted that the PCN has been issued without reliance on PoFA and as long as the Keeper has not identified the driver, this has nowhere to go. There is not much point to a DVLA complaint unless they have stated that they intend to hold the Keeper liable in their NtK and we have not seen the back of that. We don’t end to see any reminders or useless debt collector letters.

Come back if/when you receive a Letter of Claim (LoC).
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain

Re: PCN - CUP Enforcement - 6 months late NtK
« Reply #3 on: »
There is not much point to a DVLA complaint unless they have stated that they intend to hold the Keeper liable in their NtK and we have not seen the back of that.
Champertous?  Unless they have agreed with the DVLA they assign the debt...?

Re: PCN - CUP Enforcement - 6 months late NtK
« Reply #4 on: »
Many thanks for the prompt response. I like the suggestion of an appeal to POPLA.

Is it ok to use the template shared in a related post for the appeal?

Re: PCN - CUP Enforcement - 6 months late NtK
« Reply #5 on: »
You can only appeal to POPLA if you have a ‘code’ which is issued to you by the operator if it rejects your appeal, which had to be submitted to the operator within its deadline of 28 days.

You don’t have a POPLA code so you can’t raise an appeal.

You have to wait for a Letter of Claim prior to legal action against you.

Re: PCN - CUP Enforcement - 6 months late NtK
« Reply #6 on: »
Ok, understood.

Thanks once again.

Will update when i get the LoC.

Re: PCN - CUP Enforcement - 6 months late NtK
« Reply #7 on: »
Hi,

I received a letter from DCBL claiming I have an unpaid parking charge and should pay it within 14 days.

It further states this is not subject to high court or bailiff action???

What do I need to do next please?




[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Re: PCN - CUP Enforcement - 6 months late NtK
« Reply #8 on: »
Nothing

Ignore all letters from debt collectors, of whom DCBL is one.

Letter of Claim will come from DCB Legal, a sister company, and should not be ignored.

Re: PCN - CUP Enforcement - 6 months late NtK
« Reply #9 on: »
Ok, thanks for the prompt reply and help.

Re: PCN - CUP Enforcement - 6 months late NtK
« Reply #10 on: »
Hi,

I have now received the letter of claim from DCL Legal. Letter is dated 15/07/2025.

I have 30 days to pay for the PCN.

The 2nd page of the letter states the PCN issue date as 06/10/2024  see attached screenshots. This is incorrect and i presume deliberate as PCN notice date was 01/04/2025, which is roughly 6 months after the alleged parking contravention.

How should I respond to this letter of claim please?

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]
« Last Edit: July 28, 2025, 05:37:38 pm by hertsLad »

Re: PCN - CUP Enforcement - 6 months late NtK
« Reply #11 on: »
DCB Legal are an incompetent lot. Just reply to the LoC with the following to info@dcblegal.co.uk and CC yourself:

Quote
Dear Sirs,

Your Letter Before Claim contains insufficient detail of the claim and fails to provide copies of evidence your client places reliance upon and thus is in complete contravention of the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims.

As a firm of supposed solicitors, one would expect you to be capable of crafting a letter that aligns with paragraphs 3.1(a)–(d), 5.1 and 5.2 of the Protocol, and paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c) of the Practice Direction. These provisions do not exist for decoration—they exist to facilitate informed discussion and proportionate resolution. You might wish to reacquaint yourselves with them.

The Civil Procedure Rules 1998, Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols (Part 3), stipulate that prior to proceedings, parties should have exchanged sufficient information to understand each other’s position. Part 6 helpfully clarifies that this includes disclosure of key documents relevant to the issues in dispute.

Your template letter mentions a “contract”, yet fails to provide one. This would appear to undermine the only foundation upon which your client’s claim allegedly rests. It’s difficult to engage in meaningful pre-litigation dialogue when your side declines to furnish the very document it purports to enforce.

I confirm that, once I am in receipt of a Letter Before Claim that complies with the requirements of para 3.1 (a) of the Pre-Action Protocol, I shall then seek advice and submit a formal response within 30 days, as required by the Protocol. Thus, I require your client to comply with its obligations by sending me the following information/documents:

1. A copy of the original Notice to Keeper (NtK) that confirms any PoFA 2012 liability
2. A copy of the contract (or contracts) you allege exists between your client and the driver, in the form of an actual photograph of the sign you contend was at the location on the material date, not a generic stock image
3. The exact wording of the clause (or clauses) of the terms and conditions of the contract(s) which is (are) relied upon that you allege to have been breached
4. The written agreement between your client and the landowner, establishing authority to enforce
5. A breakdown of the charges claimed, identifying whether the principal sum is claimed as consideration or damages, and whether the £70 “debt recovery” fee includes VAT

I am clearly entitled to this information under paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c) of the Practice Direction. I also need it in order to comply with my own obligations under paragraph 6(b).

If your client does not provide me with this information then I put you on notice that I will be relying on the cases of Webb Resolutions Ltd v Waller Needham & Green [2012] EWHC 3529 (Ch), Daejan Investments Limited v The Park West Club Limited (Part 20) Buxton Associates [2003] EWHC 2872, Charles Church Developments Ltd v Stent Foundations Limited & Peter Dann Limited [2007] EWHC 855 in asking the court to impose sanctions on your client and to order a stay of the proceedings, pursuant to paragraphs 13, 15(b) and (c) and 16 of the Practice Direction, as referred to in paragraph 7.2 of the Protocol.

Until your client has complied with its obligations and provided this information, I am unable to respond properly to the alleged claim and to consider my position in relation to it, and it is entirely premature (and a waste of costs and court time) for your client to issue proceedings. Should your client do so, then I will seek an immediate stay pursuant to paragraph 15(b) of the Practice Direction and an order that this information is provided.

Yours faithfully,

[Your name]
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain

Re: PCN - CUP Enforcement - 6 months late NtK
« Reply #12 on: »
Many thanks for the speedy response @b789.

Will edit and send the reply to dcb legal. I'll update you on their reply in due course.

Re: PCN - CUP Enforcement - 6 months late NtK
« Reply #13 on: »
Hi @b789,

Just noticed a couple of things in the write up you provided for me to use in my reply to the letter of claim.

The first line in the reply says 'Letter before Claim' but the letter I received is a Letter of Claim - not sure what or how much difference this makes?

Also, there is a reference to a £70 fee (No 5 of docs they should share with me) which I could not see in the letter of claim I received.

Is it ok to edit these out before sending the reply to dcb legal?

Re: PCN - CUP Enforcement - 6 months late NtK
« Reply #14 on: »
It makes NO DIFFERENCE whether it says Letter OF Claim or BEFORE Claim. Don't overthink this.

Change the £70 reference to £60. It is added fake added sum for their 'damages' or 'debt recovery'. DO NOT remove it!!!
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain