PCN Collar & Cuffs don't Match

[husky2013]

Hi All,
Sorry if the title of thread offends anyone, it is not intended, at this junctioner I a trying to keep my spirits lifted.

I'm really hoping to get some help at this stage of the game, this issue is physically draining me. Which is yet another tactics used by Private Parking firms to wear you down into making payment. In addition I need to submit another repsonse by 12/08/20. If this had been a council parking ticket then I have been reliably informed that because the PCN locatin does not match the signage then the charge would have been overturned

In brief

A PCN/NTK was rec;d 26/06/20. The PCN/NTK gave a site location, ANPR of entrance and exit.

Once I'd located the bit about how to complain (small small print on the back of the PCN) it said to appeal do this.....complain do this......I sent a letter of complaint on behalf of the young person who the NTK had been sent to. Address the issue if one why the NTK had been posted 15/06/20 when the contravention occured 30/05/20. In addition I raised a query regarding the location. The complaint was not address, acknowledged or repsonded to. ....There's a thread in itself

Now bearing in mind there is no other way to appeal unless you discolse a driver. The reciver of the PCN is young and lacks knowledge of the predetors out there............
Unwittingly he submitted details of why's and wherefore's and he's been led donkey carrot sytle up/down the garden path.

Reason for not purchasing ticket was that the payphone service did not work and the operator helpline that is 24 manned even during covid apparently to report the fault did not answer.
Call logs were submitted as evidence of the numerour attempts to contact the payphone and the helpline have been submitted ......guess what they've been dismissed.

This brings me back to the reason for my initial complaint and query, because as the appeal has now gone to IAS/IPC what ever they want to call themselves because they are linked and do not appear to be independant of one another, the operator has submitted has submitted photos of signage that relates to a different location post code to that of the PCN.

In a bid to link the site location on the PCN the operator has a mapped area of land and at the bottom is typed the location postcode which is the same as the PCN -

The operator in question is well aware of the actual postcode of the land it owns, when it submitted permissions to the council for pole mounted ANPR and permissions for signage it used the same postcode as what is on its signage.

In basic terms the postcode used on the PCN is for a Street, the postcode used on the signage if for a Hill.

I have seen another thread with the something similar, however there are no responses on there

This is time sensitive at the minute. I need to send another repsonse by 12/08/20.

[ostell]

You don't appeal to the IAS, you will lose. It is run by the same solicitors that run the IPC.

Has the identity of the driver been revealed? Simple Yes or No.

To be able to hold the keeper liable the Notice to Keeper has to be received within 14 days if there was no windscreen ticket, it wasn't.

The NTK has to specify the relevant land where the car was parked. Here's POFA https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ they have to comply with this to hold the keeper liable.

But this is to no avail if they know the identity of the driver

[husky2013]

Yes the driver details were given unwittingly due to the young drivers lack of knowledge...Age not being a factor I know'
But the only way to appeal the PCN was to submit driver details because the facility to appeal does not allow you any other way
In a court of law the judge would overturn as the evidence they have used is manufactered to meet the their need surely????
Be it to the NTK or Driver. The PCN has to show the correct location ???

[husky2013]

Is there no more advice anyone can give - even if the driver has been identified the PCN's validatity is in question surely - due to the incorrect loaction on the PCN and the fabricated evidence produced by the operator

[ostell]

You will just have to wait and see if it gets to court and then you can raise the points. But the point remains that the driver did not pay for the period of parking