UK Car Park Management |
UK Car Park Management |
Thu, 8 Nov 2018 - 11:55
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 45 Joined: 4 Aug 2017 Member No.: 93,354 |
|
|
|
Advertisement |
Thu, 8 Nov 2018 - 11:55
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Mon, 12 Nov 2018 - 17:42
Post
#21
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17,088 Joined: 8 Mar 2013 Member No.: 60,457 |
You are confusing the issue with multiple cases. One Case one thread.
Yes the dates are applicable but in this case it's: 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 period 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. Any further communication with me on this matter, apart from confirmation of no further action and my details being removed from your records, will be considered vexatious and harassment. This includes communication from any Debt Collection companies you care to instruct. Yours etc If you want to continue this for the other car then start another thread please so things don't get confusing. |
|
|
Tue, 13 Nov 2018 - 19:15
Post
#22
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 45 Joined: 4 Aug 2017 Member No.: 93,354 |
Thank you very much
|
|
|
Mon, 7 Jan 2019 - 09:25
Post
#23
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 45 Joined: 4 Aug 2017 Member No.: 93,354 |
|
|
|
Mon, 7 Jan 2019 - 10:51
Post
#24
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 6,898 Joined: 15 Dec 2007 From: South of John O'Groats, north of Cape Town. Member No.: 16,066 |
When did you send your response to them? Was it exactly as drafted by Ostell?
-------------------- Cabbyman 11 PPCs 0
|
|
|
Mon, 7 Jan 2019 - 16:37
Post
#25
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 45 Joined: 4 Aug 2017 Member No.: 93,354 |
|
|
|
Mon, 7 Jan 2019 - 18:49
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 |
How 'mid-late November?' Which Ostell draft - Post #13 or post #21?
You will have had a maximum of 28 days to appeal and, subsequently, be able to defend 'with clean hands. The date that you sent your appeal is crucial given the timescale you have indicated. -------------------- Cabbyman 11 PPCs 0
|
|
|
Wed, 9 Jan 2019 - 10:10
Post
#27
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 45 Joined: 4 Aug 2017 Member No.: 93,354 |
How 'mid-late November?' Which Ostell draft - Post #13 or post #21? You will have had a maximum of 28 days to appeal and, subsequently, be able to defend 'with clean hands. The date that you sent your appeal is crucial given the timescale you have indicated. Letter was dated 14th November but posted probably on 16th November. Post #13 was used for this. |
|
|
Wed, 9 Jan 2019 - 12:23
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 |
OK.
Subject to the opinions of others, I would respond with: Dear sirs, ref xxxx I am in receipt of your 'Formal Demand.' For the avoidance of doubt, I am not liable for this charge. You were informed of this in my letter of 14th November, copy enclosed, and have ignored my demand to cease processing my personal details. I now require you to confirm within 7 days of the date of this letter that you have destroyed all records you hold for me or my vehicle. Your failure in this regard will be immediately reported to the ICO and will be brought to the attention of the court in a costs application should we get to that point. Please be assured that I will prevail in this matter. Love and kisses. I seem to recall a recent court win against UK-CPM but can't find it. If anyone is able to link it, it may contain some useful nuggets to remind them of their folly. Await the opinions of others. -------------------- Cabbyman 11 PPCs 0
|
|
|
Fri, 11 Jan 2019 - 23:48
Post
#29
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 45 Joined: 4 Aug 2017 Member No.: 93,354 |
Thanks. Do others agree with this response?
|
|
|
Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 01:20
Post
#30
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,640 Joined: 30 May 2013 Member No.: 62,328 |
For Hire Vehicles:
A valid (ANPR) Notice can take up 63 days to arrive. Although it will only be valid if Notice to hirer is delivered within the 21 days of PPC receiving a statement from the hire company. It also has to be accompanied by a copy of relevant sections of the Lease Agreement. The letter received on the 31/12 may be their attempt at a notice to hirer. But that also lacks the Hirer liability sectons of the lease agreement? and as it is dated 31/12 then it is beyond the limit to hold the hirer liable for the charge. So a valid (ANPR) Notice can take up 63 days to arrive. Although it will only be valid if Notice to hirer is delivered within the 21 days of PPC receiving a statement from the hire company. Dear sirs, ref xxxx I am in receipt of your 'Formal Demand.' The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 allows for the recovery of Parking charges from the Keeper if the identity of the driver is unknown. Schedule Four shows the actions that must be complied with for the transfer of such a liability. Specifically for Hire Vehicles there is an extension of time to comply with the onerous task for identifying the Hirer and for the re-issue of a copy of the Notice to Keeper with a Notice to Hirer and other documents. The lack of specified documents within the limits as set out in paragraph(s) 13 and 14 of Schedule Four removes any ability for you to transfer that liability to me. For the avoidance of doubt, I was not the driver; ergo, I am not liable for this charge. Please be assured that I shall prevail in this matter. Love and kisses. Also. Await the opinions of others. -------------------- The owl of Minerva spreads its wings only with the falling of the dusk.
|
|
|
Fri, 18 Jan 2019 - 10:08
Post
#31
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 45 Joined: 4 Aug 2017 Member No.: 93,354 |
Thank you.
The vehicle in question is not a hire vehicle so would cabbyman's suggestion be good to use in this case? |
|
|
Fri, 18 Jan 2019 - 10:28
Post
#32
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17,088 Joined: 8 Mar 2013 Member No.: 60,457 |
Send Cabbymans response. First class mail with free certificate of posting from a post office.
Note that letter is stating, in the last paragraph, that the driver is liable for the charge. Add to Cabbymans response a statement stating that you acknowledge receipt of their letter and confirm that you agree with their statement in that last paragraph that the driver remains liable for this alleged chargel This post has been edited by ostell: Fri, 18 Jan 2019 - 10:56 |
|
|
Fri, 18 Jan 2019 - 10:29
Post
#33
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 564 Joined: 15 Nov 2017 Member No.: 95,103 |
I thought you said there was a leasing company that was the keeper?
As such it is still hired - even if it's not a short term hire. |
|
|
Fri, 18 Jan 2019 - 22:22
Post
#34
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 45 Joined: 4 Aug 2017 Member No.: 93,354 |
I thought you said there was a leasing company that was the keeper? As such it is still hired - even if it's not a short term hire. Yes there are two cars here being discussed and as stated by another user they only wanted one case in this thread to be discussed so this will not be the hire car. I do however have an update on the hire car situation which I will post separately. Thank you for all your responses. I will keep you updated. |
|
|
Fri, 8 Feb 2019 - 12:45
Post
#35
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 45 Joined: 4 Aug 2017 Member No.: 93,354 |
|
|
|
Fri, 8 Feb 2019 - 12:51
Post
#36
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,587 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
Do not go near the non-standard appeal. You have to pay for it!
This can only be resolved in your favour at court. -------------------- 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. |
|
|
Fri, 8 Feb 2019 - 12:51
Post
#37
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 10,695 Joined: 23 Apr 2004 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 1,131 |
Nothing. File that letter away. There is no point appealing to the IAS as you will most certainly lose.
Wait for a compliant letter before claim. Then come back here for advice. |
|
|
Sat, 9 Feb 2019 - 22:07
Post
#38
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 45 Joined: 4 Aug 2017 Member No.: 93,354 |
Thanks. Will update you once anything more is received.
|
|
|
Thu, 18 Apr 2019 - 12:45
Post
#39
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 45 Joined: 4 Aug 2017 Member No.: 93,354 |
|
|
|
Thu, 18 Apr 2019 - 12:55
Post
#40
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 9,985 Joined: 20 Aug 2008 Member No.: 21,992 |
I doubt it. DR+ wouldn't get any money then.
They are just trying to scare you. Come back if you get a Letter Before Claim/Action from either the parking company, or a legal firm representing the parking company. -------------------- Sometimes I use big words I don't understand in an effort to make myself sound more photosynthesis.
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Wednesday, 17th April 2024 - 13:57 |