Free Traffic Legal Advice

Understood, that's very helpful, and I can start working on that in expectation of a rejection, but this isn't at the POPLA stage yet. My priority at the moment is be sure I'm giving the right advice for an initial appeal.

Did the keeper ever find out who the landowner or their managing agents were and request that they get their agent to cancel the PCN?

No, I have absolutely no idea how to go about this, or that this should be done at all.

...If you are unable to understand what those flaws are, I am more than happy to identify them to the court should you be inclined to take this matter before the only truly independent arbiter, a judge...

Well that's certainly a different approach to what's been discussed so far. I really don't feel confident advising my friend to send that without at the very least being able to understand myself what these flaws are. Could you be a little more explicit about this?

Also, in post 2 you say "The PCN, is as far as I can discern, PoFA compliant so any appeal may as well be as either the keeper or the driver.", but now you're saying it needs to be the keeper saying "I am the registered keeper of the vehicle. I am under no legal obligation to identify the driver and will not be doing so." Could you help me understand this? I'm advising a friend here, so I really want to be sure I understand the advice I'm giving.

I'm sorry if I'm coming across as dim, or ungrateful for the time you're putting into helping with this, but at the moment not much of this is making sense to me.

The car park is not owned by Premier Park. They are contracted by whoever owns the car park or their managing agents.  Whoever contracted Premier Park is jointly and severally liable for the actions of their agents. They can tell their agent, Premier Park to cancel the PCN.

Plan A is always find out who owns/manages the land and get them to order their agent cancel it. It is by far the least difficult way to get a PCN cancelled.

Found this which may help - https://search.savills.com/property-detail/gb0457s200121

Thanks, I had no idea how to find that out, so that's really useful. I think the approach my friend will take is to send a firm but fair appeal that doesn't identify the driver but does clue them in that we know our stuff, and if they continue to  pursue this then approach Savills with a polite but firm 'you're going to be jointly and severally liable for my legal costs if you don't back down now I've proved the fee was paid and you have no actionable loss'.

Here's what I'll get the keeper to send, unless anyone has a good reason to change it:

--------------

I am appealing  Parking Charge Notice number xxxxxxx, issued for "Whole Period Of Parking Not Paid for”, because the driver paid the parking charge in full, and retained the ticket that irrefutably proves this.

I attach a scan of the ticket, which proves that you accepted a payment of £1.50 and issued a ticket that allowed parking until 11:33 on the day in question. As your own evidence shows the driver left the car park well before this at 10:56, it is clear that no further payment is due.

I note that despite the driver entering the full VRM into your machine, the ticket you issued only shows it's first four characters, which may be why you have not correctly allocated the payment you accepted.

I look forward to receiving confirmation that you have cancelled this Parking Charge Notice.

You have requested that I supply the following information:

My Name is xxxxxxxxxx
My Address is xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
The Vehicle Registration Number is EX18xxx
The Parking Charge Reference is 7720289
I confirm that am the registered keeper of the vehicle, however I am under no legal obligation to identify the driver and will not be doing so.

Absolutely not! You always pursue Plan A first.

What benefit is there to doing this first, and what problems would it cause to do it in parallel?

Use the wording I gave you for the appeal. It is 99% likely to be rejected no matter what you put. However, you will have a record of steps taken should this ever progress all the way to a court claim.

I'm sorry, but you've suggested an incredibly aggressive approach, I will have extreme difficulty getting my friend to say "There are technical flaws in your NtK that mean that you have failed to fully comply with all the requirements of PoFA. If you are unable to understand what those flaws are, I am more than happy to identify them to the court should you be inclined to take this matter before the only truly independent arbiter, a judge." without myself having a clear understanding of what those flaws are, and as much confidence as you have. Given that you are 99% sure it won't make any difference, I see no harm in being more polite at this stage.

No one is forcing you to do anything. Feel free to try it your way. If you think that a more courteous approach to the PPC will make them see sense and cancel the PCN, I’ll gladly eat humble pie.

As for the technical flaw in the NtK, I explained it already:

Upon closer review of the NtK I see that it does not contain an "invitation" (nor any synonym of the word) for the keeper to pay the charge. PoFA paragraph 9(2)(e)(i) states that the notice must contain an invitation for the keeper to pay the charge. If Premier Park want the ability to be able to transfer the liability for the charge from the unknown driver to the known keeper, they must fully comply with the requirements of PoFA. Partial or even substantial compliance is not enough.

It will not get the PPC to cancel it but it may get POPLA to do so, or a judge. If you need more detail, feel free to have a read of PoFA here:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4/enacted

My friend has now received an interesting response (by email, which is why this isn't a scan):

===============================

PCN REFERENCE NUMBER: xxxxxx
POPLA CODE: xxxxxx
DATE OF PARKING EVENT: 14th June 2024
PAYMENT DUE DATE: 31st July 2024
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE: £20.00
 
Dear xxxxxxxxx,

Thank you for your appeal against the above Parking Charge Notice (PCN). We have carefully considered your appeal, however on this occasion the appeal has been rejected for the following reason;

As you have admitted payment was made for "EX18" instead of the vehicle parked "EX18xxx." Whilst we note your comments, we must advise that the signage clearly states, "Enter your full registration number." As this car park is monitored by Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) cameras which capture time and date stamped images on entry and exit, it is imperative that you make payment for the full vehicle registration to ensure we can match your payment to the vehicle parked. On this occasion, as you have admitted you paid for the incorrect vehicle registration, we were unable to allocate your payment. Therefore, we can confirm that this PCN has been issued correctly.

We are on this occasion prepared to accept the reduced amount shown above, this is to ensure we comply with section 17.4 Keying Errors of the British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Practice. Please note this offer is without prejudice save as to costs.

Please be advised that the terms and conditions advise that the full registration number must be entered on each occasion and/or the correct location paid for.

We can confirm that any further PCNs issued to you for this reason will not be reduced and this is a one-off offer.

You have now reached the end of our internal appeals procedure and therefore you now have two options; you can either pay or appeal to POPLA - you cannot do both:

You can pay the total amount due as shown above via the following payment options;

Call us on: 01302 513232
Pay online: www.pcnpayments.com
Send a postal order: Premier Park Ltd, PO Box 624, Exeter, EX1 9JG
 
Or, you can appeal to an Independent Appeals Service, POPLA (Parking on Private Land Appeals) using the POPLA reference code provided above. Please note, should you decide to appeal to POPLA and your appeal is subsequently rejected or you withdraw your appeal, the option to pay a discounted amount will no longer be available and the full amount of the PCN will become due. Please note, if you pay the PCN prior to appealing to POPLA, your appeal will be withdrawn as you will have accepted liability in full.

If you decide to appeal to POPLA, you will need to visit their website, www.popla.co.uk where further details of how to appeal (either online or by downloading the relevant forms) can be found. If you are unable to access their website, please call us for further information on how to obtain the forms. Please ensure your POPLA Reference Number, as noted above, is quoted on all correspondence to POPLA. You have 28 days from the date of this email to submit an appeal to POPLA. If you appeal to POPLA we will suspend recovery activity on the PCN and the charge will not increase until the appeal has been determined.

By law we are also required to inform you that Ombudsman Services (www.ombudsman-services.org) provides an alternative dispute resolution service that would be competent to deal with your appeal. However, we have not chosen to participate in their alternative dispute resolution service. As such should you wish to appeal then you must do so to POPLA, as explained above.

If you do not make payment or submit an appeal to POPLA within the relevant timeframe, the outstanding PCN may be passed to our appointed debt collection agency for further action. All costs associated with this process will be added to the amount outstanding.

===============================

So, it's down from £100 to £20. My friend is keen to pay up to make this go away fairly cheaply, but I'm not so sure, mainly because they are claiming that "you have admitted payment was made for "EX18" instead of the vehicle parked "EX18xxx." when no such admission was made, the appeal actually stated "I note that despite the driver entering the full VRM into your machine, the ticket you issued only shows it's first four characters".

So, I have some questions:

1) Is there a way to pay £20 and still contest this?

2) What are the chances of winning at POPLA?

3) Are there any other lies in their response (it seems absurd that they legally have to mention the ombudsman can't help, for example)?