Free Traffic Legal Advice

Thank you all for your help with this. I am truly grateful for your time.

I have read all the responses and redrafted the response to this:
"Dear SABA,

Thank you for your email.

The Keeper is Entitled to Appeal:
As the Notice to Keeper (NtK) was addressed to me as the registered keeper of the vehicle, I am entitled to respond and appeal.

Non-Compliance with PoFA:
Your NtK lacks the mandatory "invitation" for the keeper to pay as required by Paragraph 9(2)(e).
The NtK also fails to specify a “period of parking”, instead referencing a single timestamp, which does not satisfy Paragraph 9(2)(a).

Evidence of Payment Already Provided:
I have submitted irrefutable evidence that a valid ticket was purchased using your suggested machine. It is unclear why your systems, or your warden’s observations, failed to reflect this.

I urge SABA to consider this appeal as submitted and to issue a POPLA code if they choose to reject it."

I hope I am understanding this all correctly. Please feel free to correct me if I have misunderstood any of it.

This is the PALS service you should be contacting:

https://www.croydonhealthservices.nhs.uk/patient-experience-and-pals

I certainly wouldn't bother with CAB. They are clueless when it comes to private parking tickets.

You may want to point this document out to them:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/nhs-patient-visitor-and-staff-car-parking-principles/nhs-patient-visitor-and-staff-car-parking-principles

Especially this bit:

NHS organisations are responsible for the actions of private contractors who run car parks on their behalf.

NHS organisations should act against rogue contractors in line with the relevant codes of practice where applicable.

Contracts should not be let on any basis that incentivises additional charges, for example ‘income from parking charge notices only’.

Maybe ask them how their agent makes their income from these PCNs or does it go back to the Trust (unlikely).

Hi @b789 - I have just received this response from PALS

"Thank you for your FOI request.  Your reference number is: FOI xxxx, and should be quoted in all your future correspondence relating to this request.
I regret that your request for information under the Freedom of Information Act(FOIA) has been declined as an invalid request under section 8 of the Act.
Section 8 of the FOIA requires the inclusion of the requestors name for the request to be valid.
Please can you provide us with your full name.
It is anticipated that a response will be communicated to you within 20 working days in compliance with the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
Kind regards
FOI Team
Croydon Health Services NHS Trust
Email: CH-TR.FOI@nhs.net "

As above, but also, why didn't you give your details if making an FOI request?

Hi @mickR @b789 @H C Andersen

I've received this response from SABA. It sounds like they are ignoring my response and still insisting on the original request.

"Good afternoon,
Thank you for your email, all comments have been noted accordingly.
To satisfy data protection and to ensure we are discussing with the correct party, please confirm your full name and vehicle registration.
If you are not the named party or the driver on the day, we will require authorisation to discuss this matter with you."

PALS looks to be a dead end and doesn't want to get involved with their rogue supplier. Is progressing with SABA the only available route?

did you send a FOI request to PALs instead of asking them to get the ticket cancelled?

I like the cheek of SABA in bringing up the Data Protection angle when it is them that accessed the RKs data.

chase them up about getting the ticket cancelled