PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Parking Charge Notice
Korting
post Tue, 2 Jan 2018 - 12:52
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 935
Joined: 13 May 2010
Member No.: 37,524



A car for which I am the registered keeper was driven up to Manchester in October. It was parked in Pollard Street Metrolink Car Park (New Islington station) on in what I understand is a very poorly marked bay, but nevertheless in the bay. The driver paid for 4 days.

When they returned, they found that someone (a third party) had slightly moved the car and it was just over the bay markings and a ticket had been issued.

I understand that as registered keeper I am not under any legal requirement to name the driver, (assuming I knew) and cannot be held responsible for this PCN

No pictures of the vehicle were taken as there should be no need to do so but there were several people in the car who could be witness's.

Furthermore on the original PAYMENT OVERDUE notice, it states that if payment is not received within 14 days, there may be additional charges, but it doesn't state how much, surely that is illegal.

The car was parked in the morning of day 1, but no ticket was issued until day 2, this seems to back up what has been said about the car being moved.

Here are scans of the documents:







I have removed all information including the bar code, that could be used to identify the notice


I was considering writing the following:


Dear

I as registered keeper have received your Parking Charge Notice ---------

The driver of the vehicle and only the driver is liable for this parking charge notice. The registered keeper has no liability whatsoever.

I have been informed by the driver that the vehicle was parked correctly within a marked bay, but when they returned to the car a couple of days later, they saw that it had been moved and a ticket issued.

Neither myself as registered keeper nor the driver can be held responsible for the actions of a 3rd party.

I suggest you therefore cancel this charge.



What do others think.

This post has been edited by Korting: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 - 12:53
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Tue, 2 Jan 2018 - 12:52
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
kommando
post Tue, 2 Jan 2018 - 13:00
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,623
Joined: 6 Oct 2012
Member No.: 57,558



QUOTE
I understand that as registered keeper I am not under any legal requirement to name the driver, (assuming I knew) and cannot be held responsible for this PCN


As keeper you can be liable for the actions of the driver if SIP have met the requirements of POFA 2012, you have no legal requirement to name the driver.

Onto the moving of the car this is very similar to a recent posting, wonder if its the same car park.

Found the ref to a car being bounced, it was SIP and a Manchester Metro link car park.

Search give this link but its a dead one

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showto...;p=1320980&


Private PCN in station car park manchester - FightBack Forums
There's no damage to the car, they migfht have just bounced it. The V5 is in my name, though more than 1 person is insured to drive it. Parking co is SIP parking. I haven't sent any appeal in yet. So what you are saying infact is DO NOTHING until I receive the notice to Keeper By the way Metrolink is a Tram ...



This post has been edited by kommando: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 - 13:08
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Tue, 2 Jan 2018 - 13:01
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,301
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



The registered keeper can be held liable for the charge incurred by the driver IF SIP comply with the requirements of POFA. The Notice to Keeper has to be received between days 28 and 56 after the parking event. Was the original NTK received within that time and was there a mention of the Protection of Freedoms act on the notice?

Was that "Final Reminder" the first indication of the charge? And give us the dates please.


Just realised that this is the tram network again and as such it may be under Byelaws. Did the signs mention byelaws?

This post has been edited by ostell: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 - 13:14
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Tue, 2 Jan 2018 - 13:29
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15,262
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Indeed, I thought metrolink was byelaws. As such not relevant land and no chance of keeper liability. Not that any notice tries to claim the keeper is liable - are there any more?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Korting
post Tue, 2 Jan 2018 - 14:46
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 935
Joined: 13 May 2010
Member No.: 37,524



QUOTE (ostell @ Tue, 2 Jan 2018 - 13:01) *
The registered keeper can be held liable for the charge incurred by the driver IF SIP comply with the requirements of POFA. The Notice to Keeper has to be received between days 28 and 56 after the parking event. Was the original NTK received within that time and was there a mention of the Protection of Freedoms act on the notice?

Was that "Final Reminder" the first indication of the charge? And give us the dates please.


Just realised that this is the tram network again and as such it may be under Byelaws. Did the signs mention byelaws?



Original Notice to Keeper was not a notice to keeper but a Payment Overdue Notice.

It was received after 56 days.

No mention of Protection of freedoms act.

Cant remember what signs said and I dont know anyone in Manchester to ask.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Tue, 2 Jan 2018 - 15:49
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,301
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



OK, then you tell them that you cannot be held responsible for the actions of the driver as they have not complied with PofA.

I am the keeper of vehicle xxxx which is the subject of your PCN xxxxx. The keeper cannot be held liable for the actions of the driver as the Notice to Keeper fails 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 contrary to paragraph 8 (4). The only liability is with the driver, whom I have no legal requirement to name, and will not be doing so. I do not expect to hear from you again other than to confirm that no further action is being taken on this matter.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Tue, 2 Jan 2018 - 16:33
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15,262
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



No, don’t say it does not comply
State it does not ATTEMPT to hold the keeper liable under pofa, and as such only the driver ...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ManxRed
post Tue, 2 Jan 2018 - 16:51
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,677
Joined: 20 Aug 2008
Member No.: 21,992



Aren't this lot IPC? Their letter mentions Gladstones.

If so, they won't even bother with POFA, and will instead rely (rather stupidly) on Elliott v Loake and AJH Films v Combined Parking Solutions.


--------------------
Sometimes I use big words I don't understand in an effort to make myself sound more photosynthesis.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Korting
post Tue, 2 Jan 2018 - 20:07
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 935
Joined: 13 May 2010
Member No.: 37,524



QUOTE (ManxRed @ Tue, 2 Jan 2018 - 16:51) *
Aren't this lot IPC? Their letter mentions Gladstones.

If so, they won't even bother with POFA, and will instead rely (rather stupidly) on Elliott v Loake and AJH Films v Combined Parking Solutions.


Whats the difference between IPC and POFA.

What about the fact they increased the charge from £115 to £125 without telling me the amount that the charge would be raised by?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Tue, 2 Jan 2018 - 21:44
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,301
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



POFA = Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. the legislation that allows a parking company to claim from the keeper if they do not know the identity of the driver as long as they follow the rules.

IPC = International Parking Community , One of the groups that the parking companies need to belong to in order to get details from the DVLA. Formerly the Independent Parking Committee but they had to change the name (but not the initials) because of the bad reputation the former name attracted. It's not any better, even with the new name.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Korting
post Tue, 2 Jan 2018 - 22:23
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 935
Joined: 13 May 2010
Member No.: 37,524



There is nowhere either on SIP's website or their correspondence which tells you whether they are a member of POFA or IPC, however wording on the back of the PAYMENT OVERDUE letter, refers to the Independent Appeals Service.

It seems like they did issue the PAYMENT OVERDUE letter within 56 days, but I as registered keeper have never received a NOTICE TO KEEPER

I can give dates if you think it wont prejudice my case.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
freddy1
post Tue, 2 Jan 2018 - 22:28
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,715
Joined: 4 Jan 2007
Member No.: 9,897



SIP parking are IPC , however you are dealing with the origional company , extra charges can be added when HANDED TO A DEBT COLLECTOR , they have not done this
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Tue, 2 Jan 2018 - 22:34
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,301
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



refer to posts #6 and #7 and action them.

They can 't be a member of POFA, that is a reference to government legislation. Go read the link in post #10
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Korting
post Wed, 3 Jan 2018 - 21:40
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 935
Joined: 13 May 2010
Member No.: 37,524



How does this look:

QUOTE
I as the registered keeper of the vehicle xx xx xxx am in receipt of you Parking Charge Notice Payment overdue and subsequent Final reminder.
I am the keeper of vehicle xxxx which is the subject of your PCN xxxxx. The keeper cannot be held liable for the actions of the driver as the Notice to Keeper does not attempt to hold the keeper liable 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 contrary to paragraph 8 (4). The only liability is with the driver, whom I have no legal requirement to name, and will not be doing so. I do not expect to hear from you again other than to confirm that no further action is being taken on this matter.
Furthermore you have increased the charge that you consider is liable to be paid, but it is illegal to do so unless it is passed to a debt collector,
I have spoken to the driver, who tells me that the car was parked in the morning of day 1 and the fee was paid for 3-4 days. The driver checked that the car was parked within the very poorly marked bay. Later that afternoon, one of the party went to get some items from the car and noticed a parking attendant wandering around. They retrieved their belongings, locked the vehicle and left. On day 2 this Parking charge notice was affixed to the windscreen. On day 3, the party returned to the vehicle and found that it had been moved slightly so that it was now slightly outside the lines.
Bearing in mind that the ticket was issued on day 2 and not day 1, how can you be certain that the vehicle was parked in the manner described when parked? The driver cannot be held liable whatsoever for the actions of a third party.
The conditions state that a vehicle must be parked in a bay, but does not say wholly in a bay.
Bearing in mind the foregoing, I expect you to cancel this PCN and write to me informing me of the fact.
I look forward to your favourable reply.





This post has been edited by Korting: Wed, 3 Jan 2018 - 21:40
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Wed, 3 Jan 2018 - 21:47
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,301
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



Forget about everything past the "do not expect to hear from you again" paragraph.

There is nothin illegal about increasing the charge so don't even say it
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Korting
post Wed, 3 Jan 2018 - 22:46
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 935
Joined: 13 May 2010
Member No.: 37,524



QUOTE (ostell @ Wed, 3 Jan 2018 - 21:47) *
Forget about everything past the "do not expect to hear from you again" paragraph.

There is nothin illegal about increasing the charge so don't even say it



According to Freddy in post 10 there is. Wouldn't they have to inform you first what te extra charges are?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Wed, 3 Jan 2018 - 22:52
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,301
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



They can add anything they like to the claim, it doesn't mean you have to pay it. The usual increase is "For initial legal costs".
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Wed, 3 Jan 2018 - 23:42
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 15,262
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Freddy didn’t say it was illegal
Look, you’re not understanding. This isn’t a regulated, controlled “thing”. It’s an invoice. Nothing more. An invoice can state whatever the hell it likes.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Korting
post Fri, 5 Jan 2018 - 16:40
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 935
Joined: 13 May 2010
Member No.: 37,524



QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Wed, 3 Jan 2018 - 23:42) *
Freddy didn’t say it was illegal
Look, you’re not understanding. This isn’t a regulated, controlled “thing”. It’s an invoice. Nothing more. An invoice can state whatever the hell it likes.



Another draft

QUOTE
I as the registered keeper of the vehicle xx xx xxx am in receipt of you Parking Charge Notice Payment overdue and subsequent Final reminder.

I am the keeper of vehicle xxxx which is the subject of your PCN xxxxx.

The keeper cannot be held liable for the actions of the driver as the Notice to Keeper does not attempt to hold the keeper liable 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 contrary to paragraph 8 (4). The only liability is with the driver, whom I have no legal requirement to name, and will not be doing so. I do not expect to hear from you again other than to confirm that no further action is being taken on this matter.

I have spoken to the driver, who tells me that the car was parked in the morning of day 1 and the fee was paid for 4 days. The driver checked that the car was parked within the very poorly marked bay. Later that afternoon, one of the party went to get some items from the car and noticed a parking attendant wandering around. They retrieved their belongings, locked the vehicle and left.

On day 2 this Parking charge notice was affixed to the windscreen. On day 4, the party returned to the vehicle and found that it had been moved slightly so that it was now slightly outside the lines.

Bearing in mind that the ticket was issued on day 2 and not day 1, how can you be certain that the vehicle was parked in the manner described when parked? The driver cannot be held liable whatsoever for the actions of a third party.

The conditions state that a vehicle must be parked in a bay, but does not say wholly in a bay.

Bearing in mind the foregoing, I expect you to cancel this PCN and write to me informing me of the fact.

I look forward to your favourable reply.


A couple of things which I dont know if they are relevant,

I've never had a NOTICE TO KEEPER.

If this Parking charge was an invoice, then surely they must be registered for VAT, in which case VAT should be shown together with a VAT registration number.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Fri, 5 Jan 2018 - 20:27
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,301
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



As I said before remove the extra paragraphs you added. It is basically mitigation and they don't handle mitigation. You have also repeated statements in the additional lines.

The piece of paper you received and posted on here is, in effect, a Notice to Keeper.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Saturday, 24th February 2018 - 10:21
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.