**CANCELLED!!!!** UK Parking Patrol Office PCN - 19 minute overstay

[ostell]

Looks good

[Sh17]

Thanks I will send it off and keep you updated for sure.

Thank you very much for your help!

[Sh17]

Hi ostell - just an update they have replied to my email below:

UK Parking Patrol Office Ltd
Department 309,
Great Northern House,
275 Deansgate,
Manchester
M3 4EL

Parking Charge Number: 408934

Vehicle Registration Mark: BN58UUC

Dear Sir/Madam,


Thank you for your letter of appeal against the Parking Charge Notice issued by us on 16.02.2018
Please refer to our previous response.

The name of the driver is not required as the notice was issued under the POFA.

Kind regards




Appeals Dept
UK Parking Patrol Office Ltd

[ostell]

I would just ignore and see what comes next. What they have issued is not compliant with POFA, even though they believe it was.

[Sh17]

ostell

Is it worth replying:

Thank you for your response, I acknowledge you are still rejecting this appeal.

Therefore as stated by yourself on the NTK the driver is liable and will be forwarding the documentation to the driver.

Something along the lines of that?

[Sh17]

Hi ostell

Hope you're well.

I recieved this letter from UKPPO. They are now saying they are holding the keeper liable.

Please see attached the letter.

What would you reccomend to do?

Thanks in advance as always!

[ostell]

They can say wht they like but that letter is outside the 14 days to hold the keeper liable and the one that is important is the first one.
Sit tight and see what comes next.

Edit: Just send a quick response that they should read your appeal dated xxxxx, a copy of which is included, and their own Notice to keeper. They will then find that the Notice to Keeper does not comply with POFA and therefore no keeper liability. Later corrections to their non compliance are irrelevant as the issue is beyond the relevant period.

Any further demands for payment when there cannot be any liability will be considered harassment. Please refer to Ferguson v British Gas.

By post with free certificate of posting to to show that you sent it.

[Sh17]

Hi ostell

I would just like to say thank you very much for your guidance and advice.

I ended up appealing to the IAS. The reason I did so is because I am not the registered keeper of the car my dad is, and since this is all under his name he did not want me to leave it and have the possibility of having a county court judgement actually come through. So the only way was to appeal to the IAS and what ever the outcome it would be resolved.

I can gladly say my appeal work!! And I actually won. The operator UKPPO didn't bother to respond back, they just dropped the case and cancelled the PCN. In the words of the IAS:

"Dear The Registered Keeper,

Thank you for your appeal. Due to further information UK Parking Patrol Office Ltd has confirmed they will no longer be pursuing the matter and the parking charge has been cancelled."

I wanted to go through this process really for my learning I think its a good life lesson knowing how this all works, since I don't come from a leagle background. So again thank you for your help. Below I have copied and pasted my appeal, which I hope may help others.


Below is my summarised appeal:

As per your website instructs I submit this appeal on the 05/06/2018 within the time frame provided by yourself (IAS). Stating i have until the 07/06/2018, 23:59.

I submit this appeal on the main basis that the NTK issued by UK Parking Patrol Office is not compliant with their acredited operator, International Parking Community (IPC) as well as not complying with, schedule 4 of The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. The fact that they tried to correct their original NTK (outside of the 14 day period), may imply UKPPO know they are not complaint.

Please see full details of my appeal attached, under 'IAS Appeal'.

Below is my full detailed appeal:



I as the registered keeper appeal this Parking Charge Notice (PCN) further under the following points:

1. The NTK (Notice to the keeper) does not comply with, schedule 4 of The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, particularly:

[please refer to the attachments titled ‘NTK (Front)’, ‘NTK (Back)’]

a. Section 9 (2) (a) states; ‘specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates.’

i. It does not state anywhere on the NTK the period of parking the driver stayed.

ii. The times given are for when the car was moving underneath the cameras and as such could not possibly be considered parked, therefore there is still not a period of parking stated, as required to hold the keeper liable.

b. Section 9 (2) (f) states; warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given—

‘(i)the amount of the unpaid parking charges specified under paragraph (d) has not been paid in full, and

(ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver,

the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid.’

i. In the NTK received to myself by UKPPO (UK Parking Patrol Office) states; ‘Please be warned: that if after the 28 days beginning with the day after that on which this Notice is given (i) the amount of the unpaid Parking Charge specified in this Notice has not been paid in full, and (ii) we do not know the both the name of the driver and a current address for services for the driver, we will have the right to recover the parking charge amount that remains unpaid from the driver of the vehicle.’ UKPPO have not complied to have the keeper liable.

[Please refer to ‘IPC Code of Practice’]

2. Further to point 1 (above) referring to the International Parking Community ‘ACCREDITED OPERATOR SCHEME CODE OF PRACTICE’, the NTK does not comply with ‘Part C, 5.1’. UKPPO therefore are not complying with their accredited operator which states members must ‘adhere’ to.

3. On the First rejection email issued by UKPPO on the 11/05/2018 AND an email sent on the 14/05/2018, UKPPO referred me to the ‘Wembley Contractual Notice’ whereby there is a credited stamp stating they are a 'Member of the BPA'. Under these grounds I wrote to UKPPO to request my rightful POPLA code to appeal. Where they stated ‘Please be advised that as we are not subscribers to the Ombudsman scheme we are unable to supply you with a POPLA code’. Which is a deliberate attempt to mislead and confuse the public (Negligence).

　

4. I refer to UKPPO’s Accredited Operator, IPC (International Parking Community), ‘Code of Practice’:

i. Under, ‘Part B, 15. Grace Periods’; It states’

 ’15.1 - Drivers should be allowed a sufficient amount of time to park and read any signs so they may make an informed decision as to whether or not to remain on the site.’

 ’15.2 - Drivers must be allowed a minimum period of 10 minutes to leave a site after a pre-paid or permitted period of parking has expired.’

Where 15.1 is referring to the point of entry and 15.2 referring to point of exit. According to the NTK issued by UKPPO the driver overstayed ’19 minutes’. Going by the UKPPO’s Accredited Operator, IPC, Code of Conduct 15.2 (stated above), giving the allowed 10 minute grace period brings the apparent ‘Exceeded Maximum Stay Period’ down to 9 minutes, which is justified by 15.1. Therefore, UKPPO have not issued the NTK in accordance to the IPC Code of Conduct.

5. Referring to UKPPO email sent to me on 14/05/2018 and 21/05/2018 they state: ‘Thank you for your letter of appeal against the Parking Charge Notice issued by us on 16.02.2018 ‘. Which is INCORRECT (twice), in fact the actual date the NTK was issued is, 01/05/2018. Showing a lack of professionalism.

Please refer to ‘UKPPO Letter (Front)’ & ‘UKPPO Letter (back)’, where a letter has been issued by the UKPPO on the 30/05/2018 whilst, I am still within my appeals process. It is an attempt to correct their original non-complaint NTK, however since it has been issued outside of the 14 days to hold the keeper liable, it is invalid. This may imply that UKPPO know that they are non-compliant, but refuse to hold accountability.

[Kati]

well done xx

[Sh17]

Thank you Kati for introducing me to ostell !

[ostell]

Glad it went well with the IAS

Just for future reference a CCJ cannot "just come through". It has to go through the county court and you have the chance to defend it. Only a CCJ if you lose. In your case it would be a walkover but it is the hassle of all the documents.

[jims_01]

Hi lovely people,

I was just looking around for some help with regards to the similar pcn which you had received from the same demons. I had parked at the same place and they issued me same PCN with similar time limits. One thing I am not sure if i had actually stayed for that long. second thing, why are the times similar. I had checked some other post on google which pointed out similar thing.

I appealed to the UKPPO and got the some response. But in my they are asking why I was at the site. Which I believe it shouldn't concern them and also there is not contract to disclose it to them?

Can you please advice what can I do next? Is it worth pursuing further to IAS as you had some luck?

Waiting for you response. Below is the reply which I got from the demons. I strongly believe this is the standard response which give to all the appeals and just change the reg number and timings.

Thanks in advance



"Dear Sir/Madam,

Thank you for your letter of appeal against the Parking Charge Notice issued by us.
Having carefully considered the evidence provided by you we have decided to reject your appeal for the following reasons:

The vehicle was parked on private land that is well signed with blue & white contractual notices stating; “90 Minutes Maximum stay, No Return Within 1 Hour”.

Whilst I am unsure of the purpose of the visit to the site, as you have not stated why you were there, you are permitted to park for 90-minutes only. We are aware that this may sound harsh but, the site is extremely busy. Therefore, the landowner implemented a time restriction.

A new Law from 1st October 2012 (part of the Protection of Freedoms Act) changed liability for parking on private land from the driver of the vehicle to the vehicle’s registered keeper, unless the keeper clearly identifies who was driving the car at the time.

There are 24-contractual notices at the site that inform motorists of the contractual terms & conditions of parking at the site. These notices have been audited and approved by our Accredited Trade Association. Therefore, the signage in place is sufficient and adheres to current legislation

Your time at the location starts once you have past the entry camera. The 90-minute stay includes time to read the signs/find a parking bay etc.

Please be advised that the above vehicle registration mark was captured via the Automatic Number Plate Recognition system (ANPR) entering the parking area at 19:59:46 on the 04/09/2019
and again upon exiting at 21:47:57, as can be seen on the photographic evidence that has been provided to you. Therefore, the driver exceeded the maximum stay and the cameras automatically issued a PCN. The vehicle remained at the location for 1 hr 48-minutes. Therefore, although the driver may have surpassed the mandatory grace period by a sort period of time, it was still adhered to.

In Summation; the terms and conditions of the parking contract, and all charges, are well advertised throughout the development. By remaining at the location, the driver accepted all of the prevailing terms & conditions of the contract, including the charges for breach of that contract.

You have now reached the end of our internal appeals procedure and have a number of options:

1. Pay the Parking Charge Notice at the prevailing price of £60 within 14 days. Please note that after this time you will lose the chance to pay the discounted rate and the full amount of £100 will become payable.

2. If you believe this decision is incorrect, you are entitled to appeal to the Independent Appeals Service (IAS). Please be advised that if you opt for independent arbitration of your case and are unsuccessful, the full amount of £100 will become payable. In order to appeal, you will need your parking charge number, your vehicle registration and the date the charge was originally issued. Appeals must be submitted to the IAS within 21 days of the date of this letter. Please visit www.theias.org for full details.

3. If you choose to do nothing, we will seek to recover the monies owed to us via our debt recovery procedures and may proceed with Court action against you.
The Independent Appeals Service (www.theIAS.org) provides an Alternative Dispute Resolution scheme for disputes of this type. As you have complied with our internal appeals procedure you may use, and we will engage with, the IAS Standard Appeals Service providing you lodge an appeal to them within 21 days of this rejection."

[ostell]

It is not recomended to hijack someone else's thread as matters can get confusing. I suggest you start your own thread about this and include a redacted copy of the PCN but leave dates.

What was in your appeal?

Do not appeal to the IAS, the OP was lucky this time, normally the IAS reject appeals

Do not identify the driver, or hint at who the driver could be