PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

wasnt the car keeper/owner that parked, wasnt me that parked
grumpyboy
post Mon, 22 Jan 2018 - 14:21
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 80
Joined: 13 Apr 2015
Member No.: 76,738



What is the law regarding cases where :

- PCN received
- NTK is received
- letter saying pay full charge is received
- Keeper advises PPC 65 days later that they were not the driver and provides name and valid address of driver
- PPC say that Keeper must appeal via their website


1. is there a time limit whereby the owner should notify the PPC of the actual driver?

2. Are they right to ask keeper to appeal? Would that be admission of guilt which is not the real case?

3. How should one proceed from here?

PPC is UKPC but this is a generic question
thx

This post has been edited by grumpyboy: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 - 14:28
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 39)
Advertisement
post Mon, 22 Jan 2018 - 14:21
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
grumpyboy
post Wed, 31 Jan 2018 - 17:41
Post #21


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 80
Joined: 13 Apr 2015
Member No.: 76,738



thx. Does "proceedings" explicitly mean court, or it can mean just the initiation of letters etc
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cabbyman
post Wed, 31 Jan 2018 - 17:45
Post #22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,898
Joined: 15 Dec 2007
From: South of John O'Groats, north of Cape Town.
Member No.: 16,066



QUOTE (cabbyman @ Wed, 31 Jan 2018 - 17:38) *
Are these still generic questions or is there a live case to defend?



--------------------
Cabbyman 11 PPCs 0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Wed, 31 Jan 2018 - 19:16
Post #23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,088
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



Proceedings = court claim
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Wed, 31 Jan 2018 - 19:23
Post #24


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 41,503
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: Planet Earth
Member No.: 49,223



QUOTE (ostell @ Wed, 31 Jan 2018 - 19:16) *
Proceedings = court claim

..and post #5 wink.gif


--------------------
RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution
PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information, SAR=Subject Access Request

Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
grumpyboy
post Wed, 31 Jan 2018 - 19:45
Post #25


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 80
Joined: 13 Apr 2015
Member No.: 76,738



QUOTE (cabbyman @ Wed, 31 Jan 2018 - 17:45) *
QUOTE (cabbyman @ Wed, 31 Jan 2018 - 17:38) *
Are these still generic questions or is there a live case to defend?


no case
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cabbyman
post Thu, 1 Feb 2018 - 00:14
Post #26


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,898
Joined: 15 Dec 2007
From: South of John O'Groats, north of Cape Town.
Member No.: 16,066



So what is the purpose of this thread????


--------------------
Cabbyman 11 PPCs 0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
grumpyboy
post Thu, 1 Feb 2018 - 09:41
Post #27


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 80
Joined: 13 Apr 2015
Member No.: 76,738



the purpose was to seek clarification on the original questions asked of which I am grateful

thx to your responses, I am now confident that the keeper has disposed of their liability

Since the original ticket was issued 24/11/17, I am now questioning whether even the driver can now be pursued?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Thu, 1 Feb 2018 - 09:52
Post #28


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,088
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



The driver can always be pursued. The limit would be 6 years.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ManxRed
post Thu, 1 Feb 2018 - 09:55
Post #29


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,985
Joined: 20 Aug 2008
Member No.: 21,992



QUOTE (ManxRed @ Wed, 31 Jan 2018 - 16:43) *
Quote this:

Conditions that must be met for purposes of paragraph 4 (this is the right to pursue the keeper for the charge).


5 (1)The first condition is that the creditor—

(a) has the right to enforce against the driver of the vehicle the requirement to pay the unpaid parking charges; but

(b) is unable to take steps to enforce that requirement against the driver because the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver.


(2) Sub-paragraph (1)(b) ceases to apply if (at any time after the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the day on which the notice to keeper is given) the creditor begins proceedings to recover the unpaid parking charges from the keeper.


Explanation:
(1) basically means they can pursue the keeper if they (a) have the right to levy a charge against the driver and (b) they do not know the identity and address of the driver.

(b) no longer applies if they begin proceedings against the keeper. So, once they begin proceedings against the keeper they only need to fulfil (a) - they have the right to claim a charge against the driver, and not (a) and (b). Clearly, if - at the time they begin proceedings - they DO know the name and address of the driver, then 5(1)(b) becomes invalid, and hence they no longer fulfil the conditions to enforce against the keeper as per paragraph 4.


That took me ages and it's not even a live case! dry.gif


--------------------
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
grumpyboy
post Thu, 1 Feb 2018 - 09:58
Post #30


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 80
Joined: 13 Apr 2015
Member No.: 76,738



QUOTE (ManxRed @ Thu, 1 Feb 2018 - 09:55) *
QUOTE (ManxRed @ Wed, 31 Jan 2018 - 16:43) *
Quote this:

Conditions that must be met for purposes of paragraph 4 (this is the right to pursue the keeper for the charge).


5 (1)The first condition is that the creditor—

(a) has the right to enforce against the driver of the vehicle the requirement to pay the unpaid parking charges; but

(b) is unable to take steps to enforce that requirement against the driver because the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver.


(2) Sub-paragraph (1)(b) ceases to apply if (at any time after the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the day on which the notice to keeper is given) the creditor begins proceedings to recover the unpaid parking charges from the keeper.


Explanation:
(1) basically means they can pursue the keeper if they (a) have the right to levy a charge against the driver and (b) they do not know the identity and address of the driver.

(b) no longer applies if they begin proceedings against the keeper. So, once they begin proceedings against the keeper they only need to fulfil (a) - they have the right to claim a charge against the driver, and not (a) and (b). Clearly, if - at the time they begin proceedings - they DO know the name and address of the driver, then 5(1)(b) becomes invalid, and hence they no longer fulfil the conditions to enforce against the keeper as per paragraph 4.


That took me ages and it's not even a live case! dry.gif


Nevertheless it is still much appreciated ManxRed!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ManxRed
post Thu, 1 Feb 2018 - 12:41
Post #31


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,985
Joined: 20 Aug 2008
Member No.: 21,992



wink.gif


--------------------
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
grumpyboy
post Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 13:17
Post #32


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 80
Joined: 13 Apr 2015
Member No.: 76,738



Ok update on this one...

I notified PPC of the driver and address. They said i had to talk to debt recovery team that it has been passed to.

I dont see why i have to do that if i am not the driver as it is not my debt

Can the driver still make representations to the PPC? (they havent even acknowledged him/her as driver yet)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 13:34
Post #33


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,126
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



UKPC will say that it's too late to make representations and all he's achieved is confirm that he was the driver

As long as they're chasing you, they're not chasing the person that they could recover a payment from

I would do nothing at all and ignore all correspondence from the debt collector

If a letter from a solicitor arrives (I think UKPC use SCS Law) tell it to refer to previous correspondence with UKPC
No need to add anything else

If UKPC does issue a claim, they can't deny knowing the identity of the driver because they've acknowledged receiving the information
SCS is set up for a complaint to the Solicitors Regulatory Authority because it's either issued a claim without checking the documents or has done so knowing that you have no liability

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
grumpyboy
post Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 14:45
Post #34


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 80
Joined: 13 Apr 2015
Member No.: 76,738



ok cool thx
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 15:31
Post #35


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,687
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Keep hold of
1) Your proof you sent the driver, inc date
2) Their response, confirming they have the drivers details.

THat way IF they issue a claim, you can counter sue them - complete DPA breach.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
grumpyboy
post Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 16:27
Post #36


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 80
Joined: 13 Apr 2015
Member No.: 76,738



QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 15:31) *
Keep hold of
1) Your proof you sent the driver, inc date
2) Their response, confirming they have the drivers details.

THat way IF they issue a claim, you can counter sue them - complete DPA breach.



Are emails sufficient proof?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 16:32
Post #37


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,687
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Yes, make sure they dont get archived etc.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 16:36
Post #38


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,126
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



Perfectly good
Leaves UKPC no option except to claim with no evidence that they're forgeries

Small Claims court decides the case on the balance of probabilities

Are the chances better than 50:50 that you told UKPC the name of the driver ?

This post has been edited by Redivi: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 16:36
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
grumpyboy
post Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 16:40
Post #39


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 80
Joined: 13 Apr 2015
Member No.: 76,738



yes. They replied to the email when they referred me to their debt collectors so all good
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Thu, 22 Feb 2018 - 16:53
Post #40


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,126
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



That was actually a rhetorical question
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: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 09:37
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.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here