St Albans Victoria Street Car Park Indigo/ZZPS |
St Albans Victoria Street Car Park Indigo/ZZPS |
Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 18:25
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 49 Joined: 8 May 2014 Member No.: 70,507 |
A family member has received a number of "Penalty Notice By Post - Notice To Owner". The text states that "all vehicles are parked subject to Railway Byelaws. These have been issued by PCN Admin Center which is trading name of ZZPS. The appeals can only be made a domain called "ipaymypcn.net" or directly back to PCN admin center which strikes me as not independent!
I have a few of questions: 1. Does the Penalty Notice have to be issue within 14 days to be enforceable as some are outside of this 2. Are these enforceable given the land is subject to Railway Byelaws? Would someone be so kind to let me know if there are templates that I can use to refute these charges. Below is the text of the Penalty Notice: Any Help would be mostly appreciated Thanks Den All vehicles are parked subject to the Railway Byelaws ("Byelaws") as displayed on the signage at the location. The Byelaws were made under section 219 of the Transport Act 2000 as amended under the Railways Act 2005, and an offence has been committed by breaching Byelaw 14. Having identified that an offence has occurred, your data has been released by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency as our client has reasonable cause (under Regulation 27(1 )(e) of the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 2002). Their records indicate that you were the registered keeper of the vehicle on the date that the offence was committed. The above penalty is now due plus any additional cost which may be incurred in its recovery. In the event that this remains unpaid, then our Client may pursue you through the Magistrates Court by way of a private criminal prosecution. This can result in a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale set out in section 37 of the Criminal Justice Act 1982, currently £1000. We urge you to take up this offer of disposal. ' Additionally, Byelaw. 14(4)ii allows for vehicles to be clamped, and our client may well exercise this option in future. You will be liable for all costs associated with the clamp, its removal and potentially any unpaid notices outstanding for the same VRM. The amount payable will be discounted to £60 if this is paid within 14 days. Photographic evidence is held on file to support this claim in accordance with the Data Protection Act. The data is used for the sole purpose of pursuing settlement of this offer. Please pay this penalty now or see overleaf for further details. |
|
|
Advertisement |
Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 18:25
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 00:38
Post
#21
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 488 Joined: 21 Aug 2016 Member No.: 86,563 |
Owner, keeper and driver could potentially be three separate people.
NTK letter is when the PPC wants the keeper to name the driver. If Schedule 4 of the POFA applies to the car park, then the keeper can be held liable for a breach of the parking contract by the unknown driver iff certain conditions are met. One of these conditions is the 14 day deadline for the keeper to receive the letter. At station car parks Schedule 4 of POFA does not apply so there is no possibility of the keeper being liable for the actions of the driver. The PPC thinks that at station car parks the owner can be liable for a Byelaw breach by the driver. This is due to what it says in Byelaw 14.4.1 and the recent advice from the Dept of Transport. So the PPC sends out an NTO letter. But...the Byelaws rely on Transport Act 2000 and this Act says nothing about a non driving owner being liable for a Byelaw breach. So the PPC and DFT are wrong. Only the driver could ever be found guilty of a Byelaws breach and only in a Mags Court. The 14 day deadline does not apply in these cases, but POPLA have chosen to use this as their guideline for a correctly issued Penalty Notice. ITAL are not using this 14 day period at all. Confused? So is the DFT, BPA, PPCs, TOCs, POPLA, ITAL, ZZPS etc. Not to mention the poor motorist! |
|
|
Tue, 19 Feb 2019 - 00:37
Post
#22
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 49 Joined: 8 May 2014 Member No.: 70,507 |
So this is the reply from Indigo.....
Seems odd to me that they reference the driver as liable Penalty Charge Notice has been sent to the keeper!. I guess next steps are to wait 28 days to reply, right?.....the original NTK was also beyond 14 days of the "offence".. Thanks
Attached File(s)
|
|
|
Tue, 19 Feb 2019 - 09:06
Post
#23
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,261 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
Seems odd to me that they reference the driver as liable Penalty Charge Notice has been sent to the keeper!. Yes, by using/distorting Byelaw 14.4.1 as clearly mentioned above, nothing odd at all and entirely predictable. If you don't understand what's being said, please ask for clarification. Prepare your second stage appeal and submit as late as possible within the permitted deadline, that's not the same as " wait 28 days to reply" and you've already been told that the 14 days is irrelevant in post #2! -------------------- There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!
S172's Rookies 1-0 Kent Council PCN's Rookies 1-0 Warwick Rookies 1-0 Birmingham PPC PCN's Rookies 10-0 PPC's |
|
|
Wed, 20 Feb 2019 - 01:14
Post
#24
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 49 Joined: 8 May 2014 Member No.: 70,507 |
Hi Rookie...
Some clarification would indeed help a lot .. and how long should I wait for the second stage appeal? Thanks Bigden |
|
|
Wed, 20 Feb 2019 - 06:44
Post
#25
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 6,898 Joined: 15 Dec 2007 From: South of John O'Groats, north of Cape Town. Member No.: 16,066 |
Send it online so that ITAL get it just before the 28 day appeal deadline expires.
Draft your appeal and post it here for checking. It will need a bit of rejigging, I expect. Point 1 should be that rail byelaws exist and it is not, therefore, relevant land under PoFA. Then, continue each point to lead down a pathway. 'However, if PoFA was to apply then [point 2], if point 2 was to apply the [point 3], etc., etc.' It's interesting that they reference 'BPA has chosen not to use the Ombudsman Service.' -------------------- Cabbyman 11 PPCs 0
|
|
|
Wed, 20 Feb 2019 - 21:18
Post
#26
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,687 Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Member No.: 15,642 |
Given the complete bullshit of an appeal decision we've seen from ital, you should ensure you ask the,, if they reject your point, to cite the specific legislation or "guideline" they've used to come to their decision
|
|
|
Wed, 27 Feb 2019 - 11:06
Post
#27
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 49 Joined: 8 May 2014 Member No.: 70,507 |
Another update...
I sent an appeal - a simple one along the lines of what is in this thread. ZZPS have now issue a Debt Collection Notice without having any courtesy to reply to the first appeal....straight to this debt collection notice (see attachment) Any help would be appreciate on how and when I should respond to this. Thanks
Attached File(s)
|
|
|
Wed, 27 Feb 2019 - 11:31
Post
#28
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 6,898 Joined: 15 Dec 2007 From: South of John O'Groats, north of Cape Town. Member No.: 16,066 |
Have you sent any appeal to AS Parking/ITAL yet? Have you been on to their site to check the status of the case with them?
They should show the case 'awaiting appeal' or something similar, assuming you are still awaiting the effluxion of time before submitting your appeal. -------------------- Cabbyman 11 PPCs 0
|
|
|
Wed, 27 Feb 2019 - 12:02
Post
#29
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,687 Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Member No.: 15,642 |
Who do you send your "simple" appeal to? ZZPS? ITAL?
ZZPS will of course just send out a template response. What else were you expecting? |
|
|
Wed, 27 Feb 2019 - 16:15
Post
#30
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 488 Joined: 21 Aug 2016 Member No.: 86,563 |
You should reply to this letter, politely explaining that there is no debt.
Their Notice To Owner letter contained an offer - they promised not to prosecute for the alleged Byelaw breach if you paid them £100. This was an offered contract. There is no law in this country that requires an offered contract to be accepted, so nobody (owner, keeper or driver) has any legal obligation to pay their £100 charge. Since all you have done is to decline their kind offer, you have not incurred any debt. All references in their letter to a debt being outstanding are completely unwarranted. |
|
|
Fri, 1 Mar 2019 - 02:59
Post
#31
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 162 Joined: 14 Dec 2018 From: Sussex Member No.: 101,446 |
Complain to the British Parking Association that you’re being harassed by debt collectors whilst your appeal is ongoing. This is a clear breach of the BPA’s code of practice. The same thing happened to me. The BPA took it up with Indigo and assured me that it was due to a “technical glitch”. Demand that Indigo is sanctioned for blatantly disregarding the BPA’s code of practice.
-------------------- “Nobody leaves their house because they want to go and do some parking; parking is simply a means to an end, and it should be as easy as possible.” Rishi Sunak, MP
|
|
|
Fri, 1 Mar 2019 - 09:31
Post
#32
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,687 Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Member No.: 15,642 |
State this is the second time you know of this has happened, so it cannot be a "glitch"
|
|
|
Fri, 1 Mar 2019 - 09:53
Post
#33
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 488 Joined: 21 Aug 2016 Member No.: 86,563 |
The BPA code of practice is a pile of pants. The whole thing is based on the assumption that all private car parks are managed via contract law. There is nothing in the CoP about car parks being managed using Byelaws.
The BPA itself is a pile of pants. Whenever one of their members breaches the CoP, they quickly change the rules and claim that no breach has occurred. For example, when Indigo stopped offering POPLA as the second appeal process (as is specifically required in the CoP) they just claimed that the rules had changed but they had not yet updated the wording. Oh right, so that's all okay then. |
|
|
Sat, 2 Mar 2019 - 09:39
Post
#34
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 162 Joined: 14 Dec 2018 From: Sussex Member No.: 101,446 |
Indigo instructing debt collection during appeals is rife. This is by no means only the second example. There are loads of people on the MSE Parking forum being hounded too. I was assured by the BPA’s compliance officer that a process had been put in place to stop this happening. The process is clearly not working. Bigden, please complain to the BPA saying you’re aware that this has already been escalated to them and that Zoe Rudwick was assured by Indigo it had been corrected.
Zoe Rudwick AOS Investigations Team British Parking Association Tel: 01444 447340 Email: aos@britishparking.co.uk Web: www.britishparking.co.uk -------------------- “Nobody leaves their house because they want to go and do some parking; parking is simply a means to an end, and it should be as easy as possible.” Rishi Sunak, MP
|
|
|
Sun, 3 Mar 2019 - 21:22
Post
#35
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 49 Joined: 8 May 2014 Member No.: 70,507 |
@ nosferatu1001
I sent the original appeal to ZZPS not to ITAL. Was this an error? If yes how do i correct it? Bigden |
|
|
Mon, 4 Mar 2019 - 09:28
Post
#36
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,687 Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Member No.: 15,642 |
What part of "send the appeal to ITAL" was so tricky?!?
Send it to ITAL I have no idea why youre doing anything with ZZPS at all., When does the appeal deadline run out?> You know, we dont. |
|
|
Tue, 5 Mar 2019 - 13:10
Post
#37
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 49 Joined: 8 May 2014 Member No.: 70,507 |
CORRECTION here...... The original appeal was to the PCN Admin Center which is where the original PCN came from.
The issue is that it was sent to the registered keeper without any mention that the driver is liable. As keeper the first appeal was sent as in Post #19. I therefore expect PCN Admin centre to reply to advise that appeal has failed and the offering me to pay to which I would sent second stage appeal as in Post #18. Not sure why PCN Admin Centre sent this directly to ZZPS for debt collection. Kind of feel I am in a dilemma now as i have around 6 of these because the driver failed to buy/display a ticket .. should i admit defeat and pay up or fight them? Thanks for the help from all the contributors This post has been edited by Bigden136: Tue, 5 Mar 2019 - 13:11 |
|
|
Tue, 5 Mar 2019 - 13:34
Post
#38
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,687 Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Member No.: 15,642 |
No, why woud you do that?
You compalin to PCN admin centre that they did not reject or accept the appeal, and instead have used debt colectors. Complain to the BPA as well that no rejection of the appeal was ever received and your irght to appeal further has been denied. |
|
|
Sun, 10 Mar 2019 - 22:27
Post
#39
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 49 Joined: 8 May 2014 Member No.: 70,507 |
So the saga continues....
I have received a rejection to my appeal a copy of which is attached.....in short it has been rejected (no surprise here) and it states that I can appeal to The Appeals Service details of which i can find at www.asparking.co.uk. Copy of the redacted reply is attached...... I assume I should wait until around day 24 and submit an appeal and should i use the wording i drafted in post #18 of this thread? The Debt collection letter I received is related to another Penalty Charge for which I sent an appeal and for which I have proof of posting - so it seems they jumped the gun here. I would appreciate any help with drafting a response for this. Thanks Bigden This post has been edited by Bigden136: Mon, 11 Mar 2019 - 22:52 |
|
|
Mon, 11 Mar 2019 - 09:43
Post
#40
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,687 Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Member No.: 15,642 |
Nothing is attached.
Yes you appeal to ITAL Take notice of the OTHER ITAL Threads. This is a NEW SERVICE and they are so far making crap up as they go along. Debt collection - complain to the BPA that no appeal response was received instead they went to a debt collector. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Tuesday, 16th April 2024 - 16:53 |