Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

FightBack Forums _ Private Parking Tickets & Clamping _ Received NTK...

Posted by: Johnsmith12 Sun, 30 Sep 2018 - 20:22
Post #1421113

...30 days after alleged parking violation occurred in private car park.

This car park didn’t issue the driver with a windscreen ticket, nor is it pay and diaplay. They have used a warden whom has taken photos of said car and I have recieved the NTK 30 days after.

Am I correct in thinking this should of been with the driver no later than 14 days and in that case I have grounds for dissmissal?

I am also fully aware the notice hasn’t complied with the freedom of information act as it hasn’t issued a length of stay and the postcode for the alleged offence is incorrect.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

** the registered keeper also recieved nothing on the windscreen nor nothing handed to them by said warden.**

Posted by: Jlc Sun, 30 Sep 2018 - 20:54
Post #1421117

Which parking company?

Does the NtK claim keeper liability?

If a PCN wasn’t placed on the car at the time then the NtK has to be delivered within 14 days for keeper liability. Being later doesn’t invalidate it but they can only pursue the driver.

Posted by: Johnsmith12 Sun, 30 Sep 2018 - 21:02
Post #1421118

QUOTE (Jlc @ Sun, 30 Sep 2018 - 21:54) *
Which parking company?

Does the NtK claim keeper liability?

If a PCN wasn’t placed on the car at the time then the NtK has to be delivered within 14 days for keeper liability. Being later doesn’t invalidate it but they can only pursue the driver.


Euro

Says it’s a notice to keeper. I suppose they are perusing the driver. But as nothing was handed to the driver nor placed on the windscreen I cannot possibly comment on who was the driver at the time.

Posted by: ostell Sun, 30 Sep 2018 - 21:56
Post #1421126

Edit that first post so that the identity of the driver cannot be inferred.`use "the driver....."etc

Dear Sirs,

I have just received your Notice to Keeper xxxxx for vehicle VRM xxxx

You have failed 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 time of 14 days as prescribed by section 9 (4) of the Act. You cannot, therefore, transfer liability for the alleged charge from the driver at the time to me, the keeper.

There is no legal requirement to name the driver at the time and I will not be doing so.

I do not expect to hear from you again expect to confrim that no further action will be taken on this matter and my personal details have been removed from your records.

Yours etc,

Posted by: Johnsmith12 Sun, 30 Sep 2018 - 22:03
Post #1421127

QUOTE (ostell @ Sun, 30 Sep 2018 - 22:56) *
Edit that first post so that the identity of the driver cannot be inferred.`use "the driver....."etc

Dear Sirs,

I have just received your Notice to Keeper xxxxx for vehicle VRM xxxx

You have failed 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 time of 14 days as prescribed by section 9 (4) of the Act. You cannot, therefore, transfer liability for the alleged charge from the driver at the time to me, the keeper.

There is no legal requirement to name the driver at the time and I will not be doing so.

I do not expect to hear from you again expect to confrim that no further action will be taken on this matter and my personal details have been removed from your records.

Yours etc,


Edited 1st, thanks.

And if this is the correct paragraph to send then i imagine it will be sent to Euro.

Is this all the information needed?

Posted by: Johnsmith12 Sun, 30 Sep 2018 - 22:15
Post #1421128

Do you also appeal in writing or via email ?

Is either or a better way?

Posted by: ostell Mon, 1 Oct 2018 - 06:31
Post #1421135

Either way but if by mail then first class and get free certificate of posting from a post office. As long as you can show it's been sent.

Posted by: Johnsmith12 Mon, 1 Oct 2018 - 06:53
Post #1421136

QUOTE (ostell @ Mon, 1 Oct 2018 - 07:31) *
Either way but if by mail then first class and get free certificate of posting from a post office. As long as you can show it's been sent.


Great.

Going to throw in a quick statement about gdpr for good measure. Asking not to be contacted again unless is an exception letter., anything else will go against gdpr regulation.

Posted by: Jlc Mon, 1 Oct 2018 - 09:05
Post #1421144

QUOTE (Johnsmith12 @ Mon, 1 Oct 2018 - 07:53) *
Going to throw in a quick statement about gdpr for good measure. Asking not to be contacted again unless is an exception letter., anything else will go against gdpr regulation.

On what basis are they going against 'GDPR regulation'?

Posted by: Johnsmith12 Mon, 1 Oct 2018 - 09:20
Post #1421146

QUOTE (Jlc @ Mon, 1 Oct 2018 - 10:05) *
QUOTE (Johnsmith12 @ Mon, 1 Oct 2018 - 07:53) *
Going to throw in a quick statement about gdpr for good measure. Asking not to be contacted again unless is an exception letter., anything else will go against gdpr regulation.

On what basis are they going against 'GDPR regulation'?


If I ask to be removed from any of their records and receive no more information off them Except confirmation that the charge is cancelled I am asking their company to longer contact me and therefore if they do they are breaking my request.

Posted by: Jlc Mon, 1 Oct 2018 - 09:31
Post #1421148

But what if they have a legitimate reason to process your personal data? The ICO have played straight bat with the DVLA to date and accept that private parking companies have 'reasonable cause' to pursue. (Even when not complying with PoFA - arguably they still have the right to have the matter decided at court)

Posted by: Johnsmith12 Mon, 1 Oct 2018 - 10:20
Post #1421167

QUOTE (Jlc @ Mon, 1 Oct 2018 - 10:31) *
But what if they have a legitimate reason to process your personal data? The ICO have played straight bat with the DVLA to date and accept that private parking companies have 'reasonable cause' to pursue. (Even when not complying with PoFA - arguably they still have the right to have the matter decided at court)



If they haven’t complied with the freedom of informations act, and the charge is indeed void. I have requested to nkt be contacted again other than to confirm it’s been cancelled.

So, I suppose you’re correct but I have also now requested for the charge to be removed, the keeper will not be naming the driver and therefore I don’t want to receive anymore info from the company. If they do they are breaking my request and a complaint may be made.

We will see.

Posted by: Jlc Mon, 1 Oct 2018 - 11:22
Post #1421203

Unless you can provide proof it wasn't you driving then they won't stop pursuing you.

(I wish it were as simple as you wish)

Posted by: nosferatu1001 Mon, 1 Oct 2018 - 12:03
Post #1421222

Your miusunderstanding of GDPR is a common one but, indeed, flawed. For example, they do not require your consent, at all, to contact you. POFA compliance only afects Keeper liability, it says NOTHING about the validity of hteunderlying alleged ddebt.

Posted by: Johnsmith12 Mon, 1 Oct 2018 - 12:47
Post #1421246

Thanks for the replies guys. I have appealed this charge and we will see where it goes from here.

I have told them that no PCN was issued therefore they failed to contact within 14days and said driver will not be named nor assumed.

See where this takes us. Minus the whole gdpr thing.

Posted by: Johnsmith12 Tue, 2 Oct 2018 - 16:58
Post #1421565

Just a quick update. I have appealed said charge and contacted many people in regards to this;

The landowners
The site management
Retailers
And local counsellors and MP’s

I have had feedback from a few of the above some of which have agreed in writing the charge counteracts the POFA and should have grounds to appeal and overturn.

I am currently awaiting responses from some of the above and have also been in touch with a person at the car parking company direct to inform them of the breach of the POFA and IPC code of conduct.

Will update as continues.

Posted by: cabbyman Tue, 2 Oct 2018 - 18:18
Post #1421582

huh.gif

Mountains and molehills come to mind.

As your research on here will have shown, ECP will reject but provide a POPLA code. A detailed POPLA appeal, including late service as point #1, will see this killed.

Your contact 'with a person at the car parking company direct' may well have been counter productive, particularly if it was by phone and you inadvertently identified the driver.

From here on, rather than go bull at a gate, read other threads, read the advice offered and follow it. There are a lot of experienced people on here who know a lot more about the process than you.

Posted by: Jlc Tue, 2 Oct 2018 - 18:43
Post #1421597

You mention IPC. Which 'Euro'?

There's Euro Car Parks (BPA) and Euro Parking Services (IPC).

Not sure what 'counteract PoFA' means.

Posted by: Johnsmith12 Wed, 3 Oct 2018 - 09:16
Post #1421718

Euro Parking Services.

No driver has been identified. Phone call was simply to receive an email address for said person.

Contravene’s the POFA then.

Let’s wait and see the outcome.


Posted by: Jlc Wed, 3 Oct 2018 - 09:32
Post #1421727

Sorry for being picky but you can't 'contravene PoFA'.

They have either met all of the necessary conditions to pursue the keeper or not.

If they didn't then they can only pursue the driver. Or more precisely, the keeper on the basis they were driving.

As IPC member, they won't give up chasing. (With BPA, POPLA will uphold appeals on the basis of lack of keeper liability)

The view will be that if the keeper doesn't name the driver then they were, on the balance of probabilities, driving.

Posted by: Johnsmith12 Wed, 3 Oct 2018 - 09:44
Post #1421733

Well I have appealed and am currently waiting a response. Ntk was sent out after 30 days with no NTD being issued.

Therefore Euro has 14 days to deliver NTK which they didn’t, therefore driver will not be named and cannot be assumed.

Also EURO has broken many rules stated in IPC code of conduct.

We will see.

Posted by: Jlc Wed, 3 Oct 2018 - 10:10
Post #1421748

Ok, just to add they are a little litigious - http://www.parkingappeals.info/companydata/Euro_Parking_Services.html

Posted by: Johnsmith12 Wed, 3 Oct 2018 - 10:30
Post #1421769

Thanks mate. Yeah :/ we will see where it goes.

Posted by: ostell Wed, 3 Oct 2018 - 20:16
Post #1421954

So what exactly did you write in your appeal?

Posted by: Johnsmith12 Thu, 4 Oct 2018 - 09:55
Post #1422103

QUOTE (ostell @ Wed, 3 Oct 2018 - 21:16) *
So what exactly did you write in your appeal?



Dear Sirs,

I have just received your Notice to Keeper xxxxx for vehicle VRM xxxx

You have failed 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 time of 14 days as prescribed by section 9 (4) of the Act. You cannot, therefore, transfer liability for the alleged charge from the driver at the time to me, the keeper.

There is no legal requirement to name the driver at the time and I will not be doing so.

I do not expect to hear from you again expect to confrim that no further action will be taken on this matter and my personal details have been removed from your records.

Yours etc,

...

Pretty much that

Posted by: ostell Thu, 4 Oct 2018 - 10:40
Post #1422121

OK, it was just that you threatened to add extra. We've seen "additions" to standard text that kill the intended function of the text.

Posted by: Johnsmith12 Fri, 5 Oct 2018 - 10:07
Post #1422437



the 14 days you state only apply when we as Operators seek to rely on the provisions of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.

If we are of that time, we can still pursue our claim under contract, for which the limitations period is 6 years from the date of breach, under the Limitations Act 1980.

We will therefore pursuing our claim under the general principles of the law of contract.

———

Posted by: ostell Fri, 5 Oct 2018 - 10:25
Post #1422443

You could respond and thank them for confirming that they are not using POFA for keeper liability. Remind them that they can now only hold the driver liable and as yet you have not seen any evidence of the driver. The use of the criminal case of Elliot v Loake to make the assumption that the keeper was the driver is not appl;icable and has been rejected many times by the courts.

Posted by: Jlc Fri, 5 Oct 2018 - 11:25
Post #1422477

Quel surprise...

So simply provide them some evidence that the keeper wasn't driving and they are snookered.

Posted by: Johnsmith12 Fri, 5 Oct 2018 - 13:10
Post #1422533

QUOTE (Jlc @ Fri, 5 Oct 2018 - 12:25) *
Quel surprise...

So simply provide them some evidence that the keeper wasn't driving and they are snookered.


How would the keeper do this?

Posted by: Jlc Fri, 5 Oct 2018 - 13:40
Post #1422542

Evidence of being elsewhere - could be a ticket or receipt for example. Tracking on a mobile phone.

Or even a witness statement.

They won't give up easily.

Posted by: Johnsmith12 Fri, 5 Oct 2018 - 14:16
Post #1422558

How about a rota proving TRk was in work?

Posted by: SchoolRunMum Fri, 5 Oct 2018 - 14:26
Post #1422563

Yes of course.

And thank them very much for confirming they cannot hold you liable as keeper under the POFA 2012.

To pre-empt a crap reply, remind them that CPS v AJH Films Ltd and any similar blathering about the law of agency has no legs (as confirmed to Simon Renshaw Smith, in Excel v Smith on appeal) and so you look forward to them confirming they have now erased your data. They must now consider this a Notice requesting Erasure of your data, as you have established you are not the liable party.

If they do not pass this to their Data Protection Team and confirm the data will be erased now, you will complain to the ICO about a specific breach of the GDPR and data misuse, and will file a counter-claim, should they try a doomed robo-claim in their full knowledge that you have evidenced not being the driver.

Posted by: Jlc Fri, 5 Oct 2018 - 15:06
Post #1422573

QUOTE (Johnsmith12 @ Fri, 5 Oct 2018 - 15:16) *
How about a rota proving TRk was in work?

That's a pretty good one! Even better if you could get the employer to provide it...

Posted by: Johnsmith12 Fri, 5 Oct 2018 - 15:14
Post #1422578

Should rota be sent back to Euro as part of appeals process or warning given to Euro that keeper has evidence that wasn’t driver.

Posted by: Jlc Fri, 5 Oct 2018 - 15:30
Post #1422590

I wouldn't withhold any strong evidence. But don't be surprised if they continue to pursue.

Posted by: Johnsmith12 Fri, 5 Oct 2018 - 17:19
Post #1422627

I am interested to see what data Euro has about me. Should I subject access request them first before detailing any data to be deleted?


Posted by: Jlc Fri, 5 Oct 2018 - 19:06
Post #1422652

QUOTE (Johnsmith12 @ Fri, 5 Oct 2018 - 18:19) *
I am interested to see what data Euro has about me. Should I subject access request them first before detailing any data to be deleted?

That's what SAR's are for :-)

Posted by: Johnsmith12 Fri, 5 Oct 2018 - 21:04
Post #1422682

Think I’m going to sar. Would like to see what they have.

Also would of matter if on ntk the name of the site and postcode is actually incorrect.

Posted by: nosferatu1001 Mon, 8 Oct 2018 - 07:18
Post #1423192

If htey do not detail the relevant site, of course it matters.

Posted by: Johnsmith12 Mon, 8 Oct 2018 - 11:22
Post #1423266

The site name is incorrect if only minor.

But the postcode takes you to one mile away according to google maps.

Both the land management and owners of the land have the correct name and postcode displayed on their websites and this is completely different to that revived on the NTK.

Posted by: Johnsmith12 Tue, 9 Oct 2018 - 09:59
Post #1423486

I would rewlly like to see the deeds to the land and the contract that states Euro’s ability and confirmation to operate the.

I am having trouble finding this information?

Anyone have any recommendations?

Posted by: nosferatu1001 Tue, 9 Oct 2018 - 10:31
Post #1423494

Wlel land registry will show who owns the land. To get the title you will need to pay them. Form OC2
To see the contract? You iwll have to *ask* Euro or the landowner. They will refuse, but you ask for it in a POPLA appela and if they fail to show it, they lose.

Posted by: Johnsmith12 Tue, 9 Oct 2018 - 10:39
Post #1423495

Another spanner in the works is an sar I requested has come back with photos of said vehicle, but again no evidence of the driver.

Enforcer notes no ticket was issued due to not having a printer but dvla notes that info was requested 30 days later.

Is there regulation to say it should of been no later than 14 days if no ticket was issued?


Posted by: ManxRed Tue, 9 Oct 2018 - 10:53
Post #1423496

QUOTE (Johnsmith12 @ Tue, 9 Oct 2018 - 11:39) *
Is there regulation to say it should of been no later than 14 days if no ticket was issued?


In relation to assigning liability from the driver to the keeper, then yes, Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4/enacted

Specifically 6 (1) (b) which directs you to paragraph 9, under which sections (4) (b) and (5) state the NTK must be delivered within 14 days.

Posted by: Johnsmith12 Tue, 9 Oct 2018 - 11:05
Post #1423498

I mean from a data protection and a reasonable cause view point.

Data has been requested from the dvla later than 14 days and therefore it wasn’t requested for the correct purpose.

Posted by: nosferatu1001 Tue, 9 Oct 2018 - 11:10
Post #1423501

No, youre barking up the wrong tree. they do not use CONSENT to get your data but reasonable cause. Nothing in reaosnable cause requires 14 days. Stop with this line of thought, it will go nowehere.

Bear in mind POFA has only been in place since 2012, so guess what - before this PPCs could ask for data, and there was no 14 days in ANY legislaiton relevant to them then either.

Posted by: ManxRed Tue, 9 Oct 2018 - 12:01
Post #1423515

QUOTE (Johnsmith12 @ Tue, 9 Oct 2018 - 12:05) *
I mean from a data protection and a reasonable cause view point.


No, they'll just say they requested it so they could write to the keeper to ask who was driving. The DVLA and ICO won't care about whether that actually happened or not.

Posted by: Johnsmith12 Thu, 11 Oct 2018 - 20:52
Post #1424364

Win

Posted by: nosferatu1001 Fri, 12 Oct 2018 - 07:30
Post #1424420

POPLA win? If so can you send the decision?

Posted by: Johnsmith12 Fri, 12 Oct 2018 - 11:36
Post #1424503

No, Euro aren’t popla.

Cancelled direct.

Posted by: cabbyman Fri, 12 Oct 2018 - 18:32
Post #1424673

Could you post a redacted copy of their cancellation. I would be interested to see their wording.

However, well done!

Posted by: Johnsmith12 Fri, 12 Oct 2018 - 19:05
Post #1424691

Will do once it officially arrives.

Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)