Support with IAS Appeal

[Syxxuk]

Hi All,

I've just received a letter back from the Parking company stating my original appeal had been denied. The offense occurred on the 18/11 and the issue date was the 28/11, however, I didn't receive the letter until 05/12, I have attached the original letter I received and I used the generic response as if it were over the 14-day period after receiving the letter:

Dear Sirs,

I have just received your Notice to Keeper xxxxx for vehicle VRM xxxx

You have failed to comply with the requirements of Schedule 4 of The Protection Of Freedoms Act 2012 namely, but not limited to, failing to deliver the notice within the relevant period of 14 days as prescribed by section 9 (4) of the Act. In addition, you have failed to give a warning of keeper liability as prescribed by 9 (2) (f) of the same Act.

You cannot, therefore, transfer liability for the alleged charge from the driver at the time to me, the keeper.

There is no legal requirement to name the driver at the time and I will not be doing so.

Any further communication with me on this matter, apart from confirmation of no further action and my details being removed from your records, will be considered vexatious and harassment. This includes communication from any Debt Collection companies you care to instruct.

Now I am aware of a rule which states they class 2 working days after the letter was sent as a reasonable timescale to receive the letter, however, I know this would have been affected due to the postal strikes on the 28/11, 30/11, 01/12 and 02/12 which would have been the main reason I didn't receive the letter until the 5th. Do you think I have grounds to appeal this decision? Any help would be much appreciated!

[des8]

IAS won't find in your favour, but whether or not a court would accept the rule (as set out in Protection of Freedoms Act) was complied with is a different matter.
Do you think you could argue the matter in court?

More to the point, that notice to Keeper also fails on point PoFA2012 schedule 4 (9) (2) (a)
"The notice must—
(a)specify ........... the period of parking to which the notice relates;"
To state the period of parking is the period before a particular time is not specification of the period, which requires a statement showing the length of time of the parking event

Also the notice does not comply with the schedule sec 9
it does not (e) state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper—
(i)to pay the unpaid parking charges; or
(ii)if the keeper was not the driver of the vehicle, to notify the creditor of the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and to pass the notice on to the driver;