Author Topic: Cambridge North NCP Car Park - 2x PCNs (Read 479 times)

BB4 · « **on:** March 01, 2024, 02:41:42 pm »

Hi all

Thank you for all the posts on this thread, this has been very helpful! I am a newbie who finds himself in exactly the same situation as @CurtLemington

The driver has parked at Cambridge North station regularly since March last year. On the same day (Feb 20th 2024) I also received two "Parking Charge Notice to Keeper" letters for two separate incidents dating back over 3 months (14th and 16th November 2023). Given how far back they are dated I am worried that there could be more on the way as the registered keeper.

The driver normally pays for parking by the PayByPhone app, and there have been occasions where parking was paid on leaving the carpark, which via the PaybyPhone app may have resulted in an underpayment.

The period of time taken to issue these PCN's seems very unreasonable - should I assume that if I accept liability NCP will most definitely send any additional PCN's they can find to generate as much revenue as possible, as this is a scheme to make money out of those drivers that do accept liability despite this being a non-POFA NTK??

Reading this thread and the successful outcome that was achieved for @CurtLemington , and given my circumstances (I have received initial NTK's, not just final reminders).....please could someone validate that my proposed approach below is best/viable?

1) Do not pay the PCN or disclose the name the driver.
2) Instead appeal/challenge the Parking Charge NTK immediately with the following wording:
"I am the registered keeper, and I appeal as keeper. Your Parking Charge Notice to Keeper is for an alleged breach of contract on land that is under statutory control making it impossible to hold the keeper liable. As a matter of fact and law, NCP (as a longstanding BPA Parking operator) will be well aware that they cannot use the PoFA provisions because this is not 'relevant land'. Should this appeal be rejected, you will be required to provide me with a POPLA code where an appeal by the keeper will be upheld."

Would very much appreciate thoughts on this? Are NCP likely to reject, given there are no other factors involved e.g. the SAR request?

Thanks all!

b789 · « **Reply #1 on:** March 01, 2024, 02:50:47 pm »

For the avoidance of doubt, just appeal as the keeper with this, which is all you need:

Quote

I am the registered keeper. Your NtK is for an alleged breach of contract on land that is under statutory control making it impossible to hold the keeper liable. NCP have no hope at POPLA or in court, so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.

NCP cannot hold a registered keeper liable. As a matter of fact and law, NCP (as a longstanding BPA Parking operator) will be well aware that they cannot use the PoFA provisions because this is not 'relevant land'. If Greater Anglia wanted to hold owners or keepers liable under Railway Byelaws, that would be within the landowner's gift and another matter entirely, but not only is that not pleaded, it is also not legally possible because NCP is not the Station owner and your 'parking charge' is not and never attempts to be a penalty. It is created for NCP’s own profit (as opposed to a byelaws penalty that goes to the public purse) and NCP has relied on contract law allegations of breach against the driver only. The registered keeper cannot be presumed to have been, nor pursued under some twisted interpretation of the law of agency.

DWMB2 · « **Reply #2 on:** March 01, 2024, 02:53:10 pm »

Have split this out. To avoid confusion we operate a "one case, one thread" rule.

BB4 · « **Reply #3 on:** March 01, 2024, 04:05:37 pm »

Well noted thanks for the feedback @b789 !

As with the other recent thread on this same topic by CurtLemmington on 22 Feb - in my case given the fact that they correctly issued a non-POPA NTK as per BPA guidelines within 7 months, may I ask what is most likely to happen next in my situation, and what my next steps might be if the appeal using the above wording is rejected?

b789 · « **Reply #4 on:** March 01, 2024, 04:22:53 pm »

The above is not an appeal. It is a complaint. You are too late to appeal unless they re-issue the original NtK and restart the clock. Hence the reference to BPC CoP 23.8.

As in the other thread, the complaint still resulted in three PCNs being cancelled.

Just to clarify, are the PCNs you received marked as "Reminders" or are they the original issue NtKs, just a few months after the even? Please show us a suitably redacted copy but with the dates showing.

If they are original NtKs and they reject the appeal you appeal to POPLA where it should be upheld.

BB4 · « **Reply #5 on:** March 01, 2024, 04:50:11 pm »

Thanks @b789 !

The PCN's are original NtKs, issued 99 days precisely after the event! So not reminders, hence why I am thinking the other PCN's may have been cancelled

b789 · « **Reply #6 on:** March 01, 2024, 05:07:12 pm »

In which case you appeal them, individually, with what I wrote in the second post.

In the last day or so, NCP issued this "apology" for delays in issuing PCNs"

Quote

National Car Parks Ltd. have identified an issue with the automated despatch of the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) letters with the PCN reference beginning with ‘GA’. This has resulted in the delay in the despatch of the letters informing customers of the contravention. Parking Charge Notices offer a period where a customer can settle the matter at a discounted rate (14 days from receipt of the letter). The issue has led to a number of letters arriving with the customer with the discounted offer period either already expired or expiring within a few days from receipt of the letter.

NCP would like to apologise for the confusion this has caused. We will ensure that all of our customers who have been impacted are given the opportunity to settle that matter or appeal as they feel appropriate. NCP will be writing to every customer that has had a notification issued over the last 4 weeks. We will be extending the discounted period for 3 weeks as from the date of the new letter.

NCP will be monitoring the situation closely and will be putting additional safe guards in place to rectify this one off issue.

Once again we would like to apologise for the upset that this has caused.

In other words "Were sorry but we're still going to try and screw you over". Of course, as you are here, you know that this can be easily defeated.

BB4 · « **Reply #7 on:** March 01, 2024, 05:25:30 pm »

Thanks for the clarity again!

Having read the other post so interesting to see that they have recognised that error - maybe why the PCN's were cancelled? It's bad enough to receive these PCN's months after the event when it's hard to verify, but completely disgraceful to send out final reminders in error in my opinion!!

Please see the redacted copy of the PCN here, page 2 just has the standard stuff. Despite the fact they cannot keep the registered keeper liable, curious to know if objective evidence in the form of an ANPR photo can be used by NCP to pursue the liable party here?

b789 · « **Reply #8 on:** March 01, 2024, 05:33:38 pm »

I've posted your redacted NtK here as I do not want to download your stuff.

b789 · « **Reply #9 on:** March 01, 2024, 05:41:52 pm »

Quote from: BB4 on March 01, 2024, 05:25:30 pm

Despite the fact they cannot keep the registered keeper liable, curious to know if objective evidence in the form of an ANPR photo can be used by NCP to pursue the liable party here?

How do you imagine they could do that? Even if I went up to you and took a photo and then went off, how do you think I can identify who you are? There is no magical database against which I or an unregulated private parking company can refer the picture to in order to identify who that is.

NCP is not an "authority" or the police. They cannot forensically use an ANPR picture to try and identify someone. Do not overthink this. ANPR is to be used for what it says on the tin.

Just keep in mind that NCP have no idea who the driver is and they are not allowed to assume. They either know or they don't. Unless the keeper has identified themselves (deliberately or inadvertently) as the driver, they simply don't know. The keeper is under no legal obligation to identify the driver. NCP cannot rely on PoFA to hold the keeper liable. Do you see how they have nowhere else to go with this?

In short, you tell NCP to go chase the driver. If you're feeling ambivalent, wish them luck.

You have what is sometimes referred to as a "golden ticket".

BB4 · « **Reply #10 on:** March 06, 2024, 12:17:11 pm »

Hi @b789 – just getting round to submitting via the appeal process, is this enough please? Would very much appreciate thoughts:

“I am the registered keeper, and I am under no obligation to identify the driver. Your Parking Charge Notice to Keeper is for an alleged breach of contract on land that is subject to statutory control, and it is therefore not relevant land for the purposes of the Schedule 4 to the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) and there can be no keeper liability.

I advise you to consider this correspondence as an official complaint, not an appeal and, as such, requires a response within the required timescale that can be escalated to the BPA if necessary.”

As mentioned in the original post wondering if more NtK’s like this from months ago could exist. Would multiple PCN’s affect the creditor’s desire to try to make a claim here if they feel they can prove who the driver was in court, e.g. balance of probabilities etc?? Given all that you have explained is that even possible? I could not reasonably take the risk of losing a claim in court and receiving a CCJ due to my profession, however unlikely that is to happen.

Thanks again for your advice.

b789 · « **Reply #11 on:** March 06, 2024, 12:31:19 pm »

Even if you were to lose a case that went to court, what makes you think that it would have any effect on your credit record? As long as a CCJ is paid within 30 days of judgment there is no record of it.

This is highly unlikely to ever reach a court because there is no way they can identify the driver unless the keeper identifies themself to be the driver. They are not allowed to infer that the keeper was the driver.

How on earth do you think they are going to "prove" that the keeper was also the driver? You are dealing with shysters (Hansard) who are only interested in the easily picked, low-hanging fruit, who pay up without a fight. There are plenty of them around and it is not worth their effort to go chasing anyone who has more than a bit of knowledge about the difference between keeper and driver liability.

Are you too late to appeal? If not, then your message is not a complaint. It is simply an appeal as the keeper pointing out that you are not liable for the charge and they should go chase the driver.

BB4 · « **Reply #12 on:** March 06, 2024, 01:04:35 pm »

Nothing to do with the credit record as such, haven't ever received a CCJ but would have to declare one if I did. Apologies I know next to nothing about (civil) law!

I'm not too late to appeal - today is day 13 since notice was given - as mentioned in my previous post about to do so on the GA website, as NCP suggest for complaints where keepers are "...disputing the validity of this Parking Charge Notice".

So I remove the complaint part, is the wording ok? Do I reference POPLA and are they likely to let them decide and reject my appeal? Want the play the straight bat.

b789 · « **Reply #13 on:** March 06, 2024, 01:36:00 pm »

If you have received a CCJ and paid it in full within 30 days of judgment, there is no record of it. Why would you have to "declare" it? It is not a criminal matter. It is a simple matter of civil law. Stop overthinking this.

If you are still able to appeal then ignore the complaint to GA. Appeal as the keeper. You can simply use this:

Quote

I am the registered keeper. Your NtK is for an alleged breach of contract on land under statutory control which means that I cannot be liable for the charge as the keeper. NCP have no hope of being successful at POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.

NCP cannot hold a registered keeper liable. As a matter of fact and law, NCP (as a longstanding BPA Parking operator) will be well aware that they cannot use the PoFA provisions to hold a keeper liable because Cambridge North Station car park is not 'relevant land'. If Greater Anglia wanted to hold owners or keepers liable under Railway Bylaws, that would be within the landowner's gift and another matter entirely. However, not only is that not pleaded, it is also not legally possible because NCP is not the station owner and your 'parking charge' is not and never attempts to be a penalty. It is created for NCP’s own profit (as opposed to a bylaws penalty that goes to the public purse) and NCP has relied on contract law allegations of breach against the driver only. The registered keeper cannot be presumed to have been the driver nor pursued as such under some twisted interpretation of the law of agency.

Please let us know when this is cancelled.

BB4 · « **Reply #14 on:** March 07, 2024, 11:32:06 am »

PCN's cancelled! Must admit I was somewhat sceptical, so many thanks @b789 for all the help and guidance.

Worth noting the wording in the reply states that they have accepted my appeal for this contravention only, and not in relation to any PCNs issued in future.

Surely accepting these appeals is an admission of the fact of law that NCP are not able to pursue keepers for these NtK's on non-relevant land, and therefore shouldn't be sending out these NtK's or contacting DVLA for the registered keeper's details in the first place?

Free Traffic Legal Advice

Author Topic: Cambridge North NCP Car Park - 2x PCNs (Read 479 times)

BB4

Cambridge North NCP Car Park - 2x PCNs

b789

Re: Cambridge North NCP Car Park - 3x PCN served at the same time.

DWMB2

Re: Cambridge North NCP Car Park - 3x PCN served at the same time.

BB4

Re: Cambridge North NCP Car Park - 2x PCNs

b789

Re: Cambridge North NCP Car Park - 2x PCNs

BB4

Re: Cambridge North NCP Car Park - 2x PCNs

b789

Re: Cambridge North NCP Car Park - 2x PCNs

BB4

Re: Cambridge North NCP Car Park - 2x PCNs

b789

Re: Cambridge North NCP Car Park - 2x PCNs

b789

Re: Cambridge North NCP Car Park - 2x PCNs

BB4

Re: Cambridge North NCP Car Park - 2x PCNs

b789

Re: Cambridge North NCP Car Park - 2x PCNs

BB4

Re: Cambridge North NCP Car Park - 2x PCNs

b789

Re: Cambridge North NCP Car Park - 2x PCNs

BB4

Re: Cambridge North NCP Car Park - 2x PCNs