Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
FightBack Forums _ Private Parking Tickets & Clamping _ NCP... out of time?
Posted by: jezt Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 14:34
Post #1460992
I have received an ANPR Notice to Registered Keeper from NCP for one of our work vans. From the NtK, the date of the "incident" is 14/01/2019 and the "date of sending" the notice is 04/02/19. As it's clearly out of time to transfer liability (20/21 days after), do I need to just appeal stating the out of time (as below), or, should I also add the non-compliance with PoFA and the BPA Guidelines with regards to images used as evidence (no time / date stamp), ANPR entry and exit is not period of parking, etc etc? There is no mention of PoFA on the NtK... scanner is currently broken by the way, hence no pictures from me at the moment. The V5C is in our name and the DocRef is August 2018.
So my appeal is one of these below... but is it No1 or No2? Or is No1 for NCP to reject and then use No2 for POPLA?
Dear Sir / Madam,
The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA 2012) requires National Car Park Limited (NCP Ltd.) to, but not limited to, deliver the Notice to Keeper within the relevant period of fourteen days, as prescribed by Section 9(4) of the aforementioned Act. As NCP Ltd. have failed to meet that requirement liability cannot be transferred to myself, as Registered Keeper. Therefore there is no legal requirement for me to name the driver at the time of the alleged incident and I shall not be doing so.
Yours etc etc.
or...
Dear Sir / Madam,
I, as the registered keeper of the above referenced vehicle, received a letter, dated 4th February 2019, serving as a Notice to the Registered Keeper. I contend that the Registered Keeper is not liable for the alleged parking charge and wish to appeal against it on the following grounds:-
1 No Keeper Liability - PoFA 2012 - non-compliance
2 Grace Period - BPA Code of Practice - non-compliance
3 No Evidence of Period Parked - PoFA 2012 - non-compliance
4 Vehicle Images shown as “evidence” - BPA Code of Practice – non-compliance
5 The ANPR System is not a record of a ‘Parking Period’.
1 No Keeper Liability - PoFA 2012 - non-compliance
The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA 2012) requires National Car Park Limited (NCP Ltd.) to, but not limited to, deliver the Notice to Keeper within the relevant period of fourteen days, as prescribed by Section 9(4) of the aforementioned Act. As NCP have failed to meet that requirement liability cannot be transferred to myself, as Registered Keeper. Therefore there is no legal requirement for me to name the driver at the time of the alleged incident and I shall not be doing so.
2 Grace Period - BPA Code of Practice - non-compliance
The BPA’s Code of Practice (13) states that there are two grace periods; one at the end (of a minimum of 10 minutes) and one at the start.
BPA’s Code of Practice (13.1) states that, “Your approach to parking management must allow a driver who enters your car park but decides not to park, to leave the car park within a reasonable period without having their vehicle issued with a parking charge notice”.
BPA’s Code of Practice (13.2) states that, “You should allow the driver a reasonable ‘grace period’ in which to decide if they are going to stay or go. If the driver is on your land without permission you should still allow them a grace period to read your signs and leave before you take enforcement action”.
BPA’s Code of Practice (13.4) states that, “You should allow the driver a reasonable period to leave the private car park after the parking contract has ended, before you take enforcement action.
If the location is one where parking is normally permitted, the Grace Period at the end of the parking period should be a minimum of 10 minutes”.
BPA’s Code of Practice (18.5) states that, “If a driver is parking with your permission, they must have the chance to read the terms and conditions before they enter into the contract with you.
If, having had that opportunity, they decide not to park but choose to leave the car park, you must provide them with a reasonable grace period to leave, as they will not be bound by your parking contract”.
The BPA Code of Practice (13.4) clearly states that the Grace Period to leave the car park should be a minimum of 10 minutes. Whilst 13.4 does not solely apply in this case (it should be made clear - a contract was never entered in to), it is reasonable to suggest that the minimum of 10 minutes grace period stipulated in 13.4 is also a “reasonable grace period” to apply to 13.1 and 13.2 of the BPA’s Code of Practice.
If the BPA feel “a minimum of 10 minutes” is a reasonable time period to leave a car park after a period of parking, it stands to reason that at least the same period of time is reasonable to also enter a car park, locate (and read) terms and conditions, decide not to enter into a contract and then leave the car park.
It is therefore argued that the duration of visit in question (which NCP Ltd. claim was less than twenty minutes) is not an unreasonable grace period, given the amount of traffic in the parking area and the length of time to read the relevant terms and conditions signage
The factors mentioned above serve merely to increase the time taken to; locate a sign containing the terms and conditions, read the full terms and conditions, decide not to park and therefore not enter into a contract, return to the vehicle and safely leave the car park.
3 No Evidence of Period Parked - Notice to Keeper does not meet PoFA 2012 requirements
Contrary to the mandatory provisions of the BPA Code of Practice, there is no record to show that the vehicle was parked versus attempting to read the terms and conditions before deciding against parking and therefore entering into a contract.
Furthermore, PoFA 2012 Schedule 4 paragraph 9 refers, at numerous times, to the “period of parking”. Most notably, paragraph 9(2)(a) requires the Notice to Keeper to; “specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates”. By virtue of the nature of an ANPR system recording only entry and exit times, National Car Parks are not able to definitively state the period of parking.
NCP Ltd. have provided any evidence whatsoever to show the vehicle in question was parked on the date and time, for the full duration claimed and at the location stated in the Notice to Keeper.
4 Vehicle Images shown as “evidence” - BPA Code of Practice – non-compliance
The BPA Code of Practice point 20.5a stipulates that, "When issuing a parking charge notice you may use photographs as evidence that a vehicle was parked in an unauthorised way. The photographs must refer to and confirm the incident which you claim was unauthorised. A date and time stamp should be included on the photograph. All photographs used for evidence should be clear and legible and must not be retouched or digitally altered."
The PCN in question contains two close-up images of the vehicle number plate .Neither of these images contains a date and time stamp on the images, nor do they clearly identify the vehicle entering or leaving this car park (which is also not identifiable in the images as of any particular location at all).
The time and date stamp has been inserted into the letter above, but not part of, the images. The images have also been cropped to display the number plate. As these are not the original images, I require NCP Ltd. to produce evidence of the original, un-cropped images containing the required date and time stamp and to evidence where the photographs show the vehicle to be when there is a lack of any marker or sign to indisputably relate these photos to the location stated.
5 The ANPR System is not a record of a ‘Parking Period’
The NCP Ltd. Notice to Keeper shows no parking time, merely two images of a number plate corresponding with that of the vehicle in question. There is no connection demonstrated whatsoever with the car park in question.
The Notice to Keeper states the date of the alleged incident, the entry (from) time and the exit (to) time. These times do not equate to any single evidenced period of parking. By NCP’s own admission on their Notice to Keeper, these times are claimed to be the entry and exit time of the vehicle. There is no evidence of a single period of parking and this cannot reasonably be assumed. Since there is no evidence to actual parking times this would fail the requirements of POFA 2012, paragraph 9(2)(a), which states, “Specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates”.
In conclusion, if you reject this appeal then please supply me with a ‘POPLA’ code, where I shall use all, but not limited to, the above mentioned items to appeal against this charge.
Yours etc etc
Posted by: cabbyman Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 14:38
Post #1460995
Is the notice in your name or has it been addressed to the company and forwarded to you to deal with?
IF it's in the company name, use the short version but add that as a corporate body cannot possibly drive a vehicle AND you have failed to meet the appropriate conditions to pass liability to us as RK, you must cancel.
Posted by: jezt Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 14:40
Post #1460997
Thansk for the quick reply cabbyman, the V5C (and the NtK) are in my name at the company address. I was not the driver.
Posted by: bearclaw Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 15:19
Post #1461019
IS there a leasing or hire company involved at all? OR does the company own the van outright as your holding of teh V5 suggests?
Posted by: jezt Mon, 11 Feb 2019 - 16:09
Post #1461044
Van is ours completely, no lease or hire company at all.
Posted by: bearclaw Tue, 12 Feb 2019 - 09:40
Post #1461275
However you appeal to them you are going to get a rejection from the parking company. All you want it to show reasonableness and you may get lucky and they actually lsiten...
Dear NCP
I am the <owner/secretary/manager> of <insert company> acting as keeper of the vehicle <insert VRM>
I am in receipt of your PCN reference <insert PCN number>
You have failed to deliver the Notice to Keeper within the prescribed period as defined by Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedom act. As NCP Ltd. have failed to meet that requirement liability cannot be transferred to the Registered Keeper.
There there is no legal requirement for us to name the driver at the time of the alleged incident and we shall not be doing so. You will appreciate of course that as a body corporate <insert company name> cannot possibly have been the driver.
Yours etc.
Then sit tight. If NCP are a BPA member then you will get a POPLA code - come back if you do. If they offer the IAS then DON'T take it up, just sit and ignore everything until you get a Letter Before Claim.
Posted by: jezt Tue, 12 Feb 2019 - 10:41
Post #1461303
Thanks bearclaw. It says BPA on the bottom of the NtK, so I am expecting a rejection and then let them pay to take it to POPLA!
Posted by: bearclaw Tue, 12 Feb 2019 - 10:50
Post #1461306
POPLA is the time for the longer appeal points and others that you have at the very top. As you say let them pay for the privilege of letting you rub their nose in it...
Posted by: jezt Tue, 12 Feb 2019 - 14:53
Post #1461436
Thanks for the assistance bearclaw, and the others, the short form appeal has now been sent. Let's see what happens? Will they spend their £27 to take it to POPLA???
Posted by: jezt Thu, 28 Feb 2019 - 13:02
Post #1466146
Sent NCP the short version and had the reply to say they have considered my appeal and cancelled the notice... but don't do it again!
Thanks for all your help peeps. 
Posted by: bearclaw Thu, 28 Feb 2019 - 14:01
Post #1466168
Blinks.
Well that's a surprise it seems that NCP actually do listen at times. I honestly wouldn't have expected them to actually reaslise their mistake. Well done you!
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)