Tweet
Hi all,
I was wondering if anyone could give me some advice regarding a pcn issued by Excel within an ANPR carpark. I was not the driver at the time of the event, merely the keeper
According to the IPC terms and conditions I should have been referred to the IAS by Excel Parking upon rejection of my appeal. My appeal at the time was that Excel hadn't complied with section four of the Protection of Freedom Act (POFA) so keeper liability couldn't be invoked and they should contact the driver directly. No additional evidence was supplied by Excel beyond the pcn showing the vehicle entering and leaving the car park.
I requested a SAR which showed that the appeal was processed through their internal appeal system with the hard copy response from Excel stating
"We acknowledge receipt of your appear(representations) received on .............. in relation to the above Parking Charge Notice.
We note the comments you have made advising that you were the registered keeper of the above vehicle on......
In your particular case we are not seeking to rely on POFA 2012. Despite the points you raise, we will continue to pursue the claim on the reasonable assumption that you were the driver on the date in question until Information to the contrary is provided"
When I contacted Excel about not having being issued an IAS referral I received the following response.
" From the correspondence, I note that this was not a "Challenge" to the Parking Charge Notice, but a "Representation" alluding to the transfer of liability as your communication simply states that you were the registered keeper and that we were required to "contact the driver directly."
The representation as the Registered Keeper was acknowledged and replied on the ..........., in which the representation was responded to and you were asked to provide the name and address of the Driver responsible and that the case would be placed temporarily on hold to allow receipt of this information.
As far as I am able to determine, there was no response to our communication and since there had been no formal Challenge to the PCN, as the correspondence simply alluded to driver liability, there was nothing for us to respond to that would qualify for representation to the Independent Appeals Service (IAS)."
Now I'm a little annoyed.as Excel eventually cancelled the PCN at the Acknowledgement of Service stage, but I had almost five years of aggressive, stress inducing material so would have appreciated completing my counterclaim, furthermore I feel I was denied the opportunity to end all of this years ago through the IAS route.
Could someone give there opinion as to whether Excel were justified in not referring me? or if they were basically trying to wriggle out of the fact they should have referred me.
Kind regards
Moon x
I was wondering if anyone could give me some advice regarding a pcn issued by Excel within an ANPR carpark. I was not the driver at the time of the event, merely the keeper
According to the IPC terms and conditions I should have been referred to the IAS by Excel Parking upon rejection of my appeal. My appeal at the time was that Excel hadn't complied with section four of the Protection of Freedom Act (POFA) so keeper liability couldn't be invoked and they should contact the driver directly. No additional evidence was supplied by Excel beyond the pcn showing the vehicle entering and leaving the car park.
I requested a SAR which showed that the appeal was processed through their internal appeal system with the hard copy response from Excel stating
"We acknowledge receipt of your appear(representations) received on .............. in relation to the above Parking Charge Notice.
We note the comments you have made advising that you were the registered keeper of the above vehicle on......
In your particular case we are not seeking to rely on POFA 2012. Despite the points you raise, we will continue to pursue the claim on the reasonable assumption that you were the driver on the date in question until Information to the contrary is provided"
When I contacted Excel about not having being issued an IAS referral I received the following response.
" From the correspondence, I note that this was not a "Challenge" to the Parking Charge Notice, but a "Representation" alluding to the transfer of liability as your communication simply states that you were the registered keeper and that we were required to "contact the driver directly."
The representation as the Registered Keeper was acknowledged and replied on the ..........., in which the representation was responded to and you were asked to provide the name and address of the Driver responsible and that the case would be placed temporarily on hold to allow receipt of this information.
As far as I am able to determine, there was no response to our communication and since there had been no formal Challenge to the PCN, as the correspondence simply alluded to driver liability, there was nothing for us to respond to that would qualify for representation to the Independent Appeals Service (IAS)."
Now I'm a little annoyed.as Excel eventually cancelled the PCN at the Acknowledgement of Service stage, but I had almost five years of aggressive, stress inducing material so would have appreciated completing my counterclaim, furthermore I feel I was denied the opportunity to end all of this years ago through the IAS route.
Could someone give there opinion as to whether Excel were justified in not referring me? or if they were basically trying to wriggle out of the fact they should have referred me.
Kind regards
Moon x
Comment