PCN Gatwick McDonalds - won

[jstimmo]

Apologies i posted this in the wrong forum first.

Hi, My wife has received a parking charge notice for a vehicle which she owns but does not drive (she is not even on the insurance for the vehicle). The driver is our son, who is out of the country until the end of Jan 2016 and also on the step-change debt list. The letter states that this is the second letter but we have no record of the 1st.

the date of the 'offence' was 16/11/2015 with the date of the reminder notice being 22/12/2015.

the overstay was a minimal 11 minutes but as our son is out of the country we have no way of getting this payed by him until he returns, and then going by his previous record hw will only pay a monthly amount via step change as at present he is unemployed.

As his parents we do not want to have to pay for the parking but note that apparently the debt will be passed on to a debt recovery company and in some cases notices to bailiffs can be issued. As our son and the vehicle are both registered to our address will the bailiffs be allowed to take our property if this notice is not settled?

your earliest response would be very much appreciated.

[ostell]

Re: PCN Gatwick McDonalds

First of all Bailiffs can only visit if the matter is taken to court and you lost and you didn't pay. Otherwise there will be no visits.

Without full details it will be difficult to work out. Which parking company was this? If your son was staying abroad for a longer period then the advice would be to name him as the driver, giving his address abroad, and let the company chase him abroad. This would remove any liability from your wife.

Otherwise you will have to write to the company saying that they have failed to get in touch with you within 14 days, as required by POFA legislation, and they cannot therefore hold you liable for the charge and therefore take it up with the driver (who they don't know and you don't have to tell them).

You could also mention that the time they have given is not parking time but the time seen by cameras and as such the time parked is somewhat less.

This is a response given in another forum:

"I am the registered keeper of the vehicle and since you have failed to meet the requirements of POFA, I cannot be held liable for any Parking Charge Notices. With this in mind I would suggest you take the issue up with the driver as you cannot hold the keeper liable."

[jstimmo]

Re: PCN Gatwick McDonalds

First of all Bailiffs can only visit if the matter is taken to court and you lost and you didn't pay. Otherwise there will be no visits.

Without full details it will be difficult to work out. Which parking company was this? If your son was staying abroad for a longer period then the advice would be to name him as the driver, giving his address abroad, and let the company chase him abroad. This would remove any liability from your wife.

Otherwise you will have to write to the company saying that they have failed to get in touch with you within 14 days, as required by POFA legislation, and they cannot therefore hold you liable for the charge and therefore take it up with the driver (who they don't know and you don't have to tell them).

You could also mention that the time they have given is not parking time but the time seen by cameras and as such the time parked is somewhat less.

This is a response given in another forum:

"I am the registered keeper of the vehicle and since you have failed to meet the requirements of POFA, I cannot be held liable for any Parking Charge Notices. With this in mind I would suggest you take the issue up with the driver as you cannot hold the keeper liable."

Many thanks for your prompt response.

The parking company was MET Parking services.

[jstimmo]

Re: PCN Gatwick McDonalds

First of all Bailiffs can only visit if the matter is taken to court and you lost and you didn't pay. Otherwise there will be no visits.

Without full details it will be difficult to work out. Which parking company was this? If your son was staying abroad for a longer period then the advice would be to name him as the driver, giving his address abroad, and let the company chase him abroad. This would remove any liability from your wife.

Otherwise you will have to write to the company saying that they have failed to get in touch with you within 14 days, as required by POFA legislation, and they cannot therefore hold you liable for the charge and therefore take it up with the driver (who they don't know and you don't have to tell them).

You could also mention that the time they have given is not parking time but the time seen by cameras and as such the time parked is somewhat less.

This is a response given in another forum:

"I am the registered keeper of the vehicle and since you have failed to meet the requirements of POFA, I cannot be held liable for any Parking Charge Notices. With this in mind I would suggest you take the issue up with the driver as you cannot hold the keeper liable."

many thanks for your response
The Parking company was MET Parking services.

[ostell]

Re: PCN Gatwick McDonalds

If your son has a valid address then name him and give his foreign address to Met. Do this so that they can send out a charge notice before he returns. You may get some grief about an address abroad but that is tough on Met. If they come back to harass you then you can say that you are no longer liable as you have named the driver. You still have the non conformance with POFA up your sleeve.

They may say that it is a reasonable assumption that your wife was driving but you can show that your wife was not insured to drive and was not driving.

[mystery1]

Re: PCN Gatwick McDonalds

I wouldn't let Met chase your son just yet.

Dear Met,

I am the registered keeper, but not driver of vehicle xxxxxx. I am not insured to drive this vehicle. On xxxxx i received a letter from Met Parking which appears to be a reminder. No notice to keeper has been received prior to this 1 st communication dated xxxxxx.

As you have failed to comply with the BPA code of practice allowing time to appeal and PoFA 2012 for keeper liability i trust you will cancel this ticket forthwith.

Yours etc

M1

[ostell]

Re: PCN Gatwick McDonalds

Mystery, the idea was to set Met on a wild goose chase and remove keeper liability. If it bounces then the fall back is failure of POFA.

[mystery1]

Re: PCN Gatwick McDonalds

Mystery, the idea was to set Met on a wild goose chase and remove keeper liability. If it bounces then the fall back is failure of POFA.

Try and get it binned and name the driver if court looks very likely, IMO.

M1

[Kati]

Re: PCN Gatwick McDonalds

newest correspondence:

[mystery1]

Re: PCN Gatwick McDonalds

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co...a-process.html

jstimmopopla.rtf

M1

[jstimmo]

Re: PCN Gatwick McDonalds

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co...a-process.html

[ATTACH=CONFIG]21705[/ATTACH]

M1

MEP DROP CHARGE!!!!!

From: POPLA <info@popla.co.uk>
Date: 5 February 2016 at 15:05:18 GMT
Subject: 3860116575 Message from POPLA PTL:0002842

Dear .........................................


Thank you for submitting your parking charge Appeal to POPLA.

An Appeal has been opened with the reference 3860116575.

MET Parking Services have told us they do not wish to contest the Appeal. This means that your Appeal is successful and you do not need to pay the parking charge.

Yours sincerely

POPLA Team

ET6116/001NY THANKS TO MYSTERY 1 AND ALL WHO HELPED AT LEGAL BEAGLES