Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hi all, appreciate you taking the time to help with this PCN.

Details below:

The driver parked at the leisure center on the 2nd of September. They used the facilities for a paid class.
The driver is adamant that they inputted the car registration in the vehicle registration system prior to attending the class, although no evidence is available to prove this I'm afraid.

My understanding is that the parking is free for 2hrs and 45 minutes if you register the vehicle on arrival (As per https://www.everyoneactive.com/centre/hartham-leisure-centre/).
Here is a Google Maps link to the leisure center https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Hartham+Leisure+Centre/@51.8004989,-0.0769562,200m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m6!3m5!1s0x4876268e05e2bff1:0x2e34fe4aa0ac1e27!8m2!3d51.8004989!4d-0.0763125!16s%2Fg%2F1v_s5cmj?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI1MTEwMi4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D

On the 1st of October, I, the registered keeper (I also have the V5C), received a PCN through the post.
Please see a copy of the PCN here https://ibb.co/VcVW3rFj

On the 12th of October, the driver made an appeal via the https://appeals.ce-service.co.uk/ website.
The driver did not keep a copy of the original appeal, and no confirmation after submitting the appeal was received sadly.

• Has anyone else heard of this happening before? Submitting an appeal but it seemingly going nowhere / not received?
  It might make sense to record the screen while submitting the appeal in future to have evidence perhaps?

The appeal was basically stating that the driver did indeed enter the vehicle registration prior to beginning the class. It also mentioned how they discussed with other people who park there have had similar PCNs issues unexpectedly. It also requested more evidence to support the claim. The appeal was basically asking to be reasonable and give benefit of the doubt I believe.
The driver also complained to the leisure center, who told them to raise an appeal.

On the 3rd of November, I, the registered keeper, received another PCN through the post.
Please see a copy the PCN here https://ibb.co/fVwDkCLc

If I log onto https://appeals.ce-service.co.uk/, there is still the option to appeal.

Lastly, we couldn't find a number to call CE parking to discuss the matter. It doesn't seem an option for this company which is quite a surprise?


Any advice on how to handle this would be much appreciated.
Happy to provide more information as needed and find a path forward.


Thanks very much!

Please read https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/

You have obscured too much information, such as dates.

Apologies, thanks for pointing out my mistake. I have gone and updated the images in the original post which now includes additional dates.

You appear to be under the misapprehension that you are dealing with a firm that has any sort of customer ethos, rather than a firm of ex-clamper thugs out to scam you.

I note for your language that you are not identifying the driver, which is good. However, we would really need to know EXACTLY the wording you used in the appeal, to be confident. For example, was there any reference made about the driver in the first person rather than in the third person? For example, no "I did this or that", only "the driver did this or that"?

The reason is because the Notice to Keeper (NtK) is not PoFA compliant and therefore ONLY the driver can be liable. Of course, they have no idea who the driver is unless the Keeper blabs it, inadvertently or otherwise.

You say that their website still gives the option to maker an appeal, which if that is the case, then you simply appeal with the following advice:

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. CEL 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. CEL have no hope at POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.

Thanks for your quick reply. Unfortunately, there is no copy of the original appeal. I don't know the details I'm afraid, but I will double check and update the thread if it is discovered.
However, is it safe to assume that the appeal was not received? I ask this because:

• When the appeal was made, no confirmation was received. Nothing can be found regarding the appeal that was submitted. Is this expected?
• Shouldn't there be a result / outcome of the original appeal, before the second notice was sent / received? The second notice is worded as though there was no response / there was no appeal / the first notice was ignored. I would have thought there was some kind of wording / acknowledgement saying "your appeal was rejected" or something along those lines.

Either way, thanks very much for providing the appeal wording.

I'll await your further comment on the above questions before submitting.

Only the driver can be liable for the alleged breach of contract they are claiming. They have no idea of the drivers identity unless you, the Keeper, the recipient of the NtK, reveals it to them, inadvertently, or otherwise. If you, the Keeper, refer to the driver in the first person, then it is pretty obvious that you, the Keeper, were also the driver.

If the driver has not been identified, then they cannot rely on PoFA 2012 to transfer liability from the unknown driver to the known Keeper. There can be no presumption or inference that the Keeper was the driver. The burden of proof is on the operator to prove that the Keeper was the driver. The only way they could know that is if the Keeper blabbed it to them... inadvertently or otherwise!

So, if the driver is identified, the "golden ticket" element of the PCN is flushed down the proverbial loo and they can pursue you without having to rely on PoFA. Not that that means all is lost, however, the single point about not being liable, is lost and you would have to rely on a number of other defences such as signage, contract, landowner authority and so on. Also, in most cases, even if a claim is eventually issued, whether directly by CEL or through a bulk litigator, most are either struck out or discontinued.

I had a response to the appeal. They cancelled the PCN.

Thanks again for the assistance.