PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

St Albans Victoria Street Car Park Indigo/ZZPS
Bigden136
post Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 18:25
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 40
Joined: 8 May 2014
Member No.: 70,507



A family member has received a number of "Penalty Notice By Post - Notice To Owner". The text states that "all vehicles are parked subject to Railway Byelaws. These have been issued by PCN Admin Center which is trading name of ZZPS. The appeals can only be made a domain called "ipaymypcn.net" or directly back to PCN admin center which strikes me as not independent!

I have a few of questions:


1. Does the Penalty Notice have to be issue within 14 days to be enforceable as some are outside of this
2. Are these enforceable given the land is subject to Railway Byelaws?

Would someone be so kind to let me know if there are templates that I can use to refute these charges.

Below is the text of the Penalty Notice:

Any Help would be mostly appreciated
Thanks
Den


All vehicles are parked subject to the Railway Byelaws ("Byelaws") as displayed on the signage at the location.
The Byelaws were made under section 219 of the Transport Act 2000 as amended under the Railways Act 2005, and an offence has been committed by breaching Byelaw 14. Having identified that an offence has occurred, your data has been released by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency as our client has reasonable cause (under Regulation 27(1 )(e) of the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 2002). Their records indicate that you were the registered keeper of the vehicle on the date that the offence was committed.
The above penalty is now due plus any additional cost which may be incurred in its recovery.
In the event that this remains unpaid, then our Client may pursue you through the Magistrates Court by way of a private criminal prosecution. This can result in a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale set out in section 37 of the Criminal Justice Act 1982, currently £1000. We urge you to take up this offer of disposal. '
Additionally, Byelaw. 14(4)ii allows for vehicles to be clamped, and our client may well exercise this option in future. You will be liable for all costs associated with the clamp, its removal and potentially any unpaid notices outstanding for the same VRM.
The amount payable will be discounted to £60 if this is paid within 14 days.
Photographic evidence is held on file to support this claim in accordance with the Data Protection Act. The data is used for the sole purpose of pursuing settlement of this offer.
Please pay this penalty now or see overleaf for further details.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
5 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 18:25
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Redivi
post Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 19:27
Post #2


Member


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



What is the exact reason for the Penalty Notice ?

Indigo notices often say that they're for "Failure to display a valid permit" which isn't a byelaw offence

There is no time limit to issue a Penalty Notice
The later the better because it's easier to drag the process out past six months after which no prosecution is possible

They can't be enforced because there is no legislation that enables it
They're offers to avoid prosecution and it's not an offence if you don't accept the offer

Private prosecutions by Indigo are almost unknown

Which Indigo and which railway station ?
Indigo Park Solutions issues a lot of these where Indigo Park Services has the contract

I would ignore ZZPS and wait until the second letter from QFD Solicitors
It often writes under the name Wright Hassall
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cabbyman
post Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 19:45
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,806
Joined: 15 Dec 2007
From: South of John O'Groats, north of Cape Town.
Member No.: 16,066



Please show us the PCN, both sides, suitably redacted of identifying detail but leaving in dates.

I think we may be nearer the beginning of the process than may first appear apparent.


--------------------
Cabbyman 10 PPCs 0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bigden136
post Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 23:28
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 40
Joined: 8 May 2014
Member No.: 70,507



HI Redivi & Cabbyman,

Thanks for the initial response:

A copy of the redacted PCN can be found with this link:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1hMB-lrd6F...TzTvhBLEw8yGEC9

Thanks
Den
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Sun, 13 Jan 2019 - 01:50
Post #5


Member


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



According to Parkopedia and Indigo's own website, the parking at the location is managed by Indigo Park Services UK Ltd, not Indigo Park Solutions

ZZPS is contracted by Indigo to manage its appeal service
It also has the contract to pursue payment for the appeals that it rejects

You are correct to believe that it isn't independent

Didn't realise that you've just received the Notice to Owner
In which case you should appeal

Do not, however, appeal until as near to the deadline as possible
Do not identify the driver

Why do you think Indigo believes the parking wasn't paid for ?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bigden136
post Sun, 13 Jan 2019 - 02:12
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 40
Joined: 8 May 2014
Member No.: 70,507



Hi Redivi,

Does this mean that the penalty notice is being requested by the wrong entity?

What would be the basis of the appeal....the fact it has been "notice to owner"

The reason the parking was not paid for is that they did not believe that charges applied out of working hours so did not purchase a ticket. Unfortunately this was done for a few days in a row so there are several Penalty Notices which is why I am keen to find a way to mitigate it.

Thanks
Den


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cabbyman
post Sun, 13 Jan 2019 - 06:12
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,806
Joined: 15 Dec 2007
From: South of John O'Groats, north of Cape Town.
Member No.: 16,066



For each notice, you appeal as Registered Keeper, taking extreme care not to identify the driver, so that they receive it on about day 26. Draft your appeal and post it here for checking.

What happens next is a bit in the air at the moment. Originally, we would have expected a POPLA code for a further appeal but, it would appear that there is another appeals body, ITAL, that you may be invited to use for the second stage appeal. Regardless, you would make the same appeal as you would have to POPLA to cover non-relevant land for POPLA. One of the Indigo companies is a stranger to the contract. To decide which, you will have to obtain photos of the signs at the car park. Various other points can be thrown into a good appeal. Do some reading of other threads and start preparing your draft after you have drafted your first appeal.

Ultimately, everything goes as close to the deadlines as possible. The intention is to get beyond the 6 months mark when it becomes impossible to take action under byelaw 14, if it is even possible before that!


--------------------
Cabbyman 10 PPCs 0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Sun, 13 Jan 2019 - 08:53
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 42,850
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



Worst still I would suggest that as the wrong company has issued the penalty it had no authority to do so, as such the penalty is a nullify. As it’s (claimed to be) a penalty issued under Byelaws the issuer has to have authority to do so and that can only come from the Train Operating Company via the contract with one of the Indigo’s.

With ITAL being new to parking I see an opportunity to really tie them up in notes and make them regret ever taking these cases on. A Template appeal which puts all the issues together along with whatever issues are unique to each case seems very attractive.

This post has been edited by The Rookie: Sun, 13 Jan 2019 - 08:55


--------------------
There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!

S172's
Rookies 1-0 Kent

Council PCN's
Rookies 1-0 Warwick
Rookies 1-0 Birmingham

PPC PCN's
Rookies 10-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bigden136
post Sun, 13 Jan 2019 - 11:47
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 40
Joined: 8 May 2014
Member No.: 70,507



All,

Thanks for feedback so far... would anyone know where I can find or be able to assist with a template appeal text?

Thanks
Den

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cabbyman
post Sun, 13 Jan 2019 - 12:01
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,806
Joined: 15 Dec 2007
From: South of John O'Groats, north of Cape Town.
Member No.: 16,066



Look in other threads. You need to do your own research so that you get an understanding of the principles involved.


--------------------
Cabbyman 10 PPCs 0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Spudandros
post Sun, 13 Jan 2019 - 14:40
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 215
Joined: 7 Feb 2016
Member No.: 82,244



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sun, 13 Jan 2019 - 08:53) *
Worst still I would suggest that as the wrong company has issued the penalty it had no authority to do so, as such the penalty is a nullify. As it’s (claimed to be) a penalty issued under Byelaws the issuer has to have authority to do so and that can only come from the Train Operating Company via the contract with one of the Indigo’s.

With ITAL being new to parking I see an opportunity to really tie them up in notes and make them regret ever taking these cases on. A Template appeal which puts all the issues together along with whatever issues are unique to each case seems very attractive.


Isn't ITAl to do with fare dodging penalties, rather than bylaw contravention?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Gary Bloke
post Sun, 13 Jan 2019 - 19:22
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 272
Joined: 21 Aug 2016
Member No.: 86,563



Indigo are now using ITAL as the second stage appeal for Byelaws penalty notices at railway station car parks. POPLA is used for everything else.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bigden136
post Wed, 16 Jan 2019 - 15:00
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 40
Joined: 8 May 2014
Member No.: 70,507



Hi,

Just as a point of clarification... does POFA apply under the railway byelaws in as much that the notice must be issued within 14 days?

Thanks
Den
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dramaqueen
post Wed, 16 Jan 2019 - 15:14
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 326
Joined: 1 Jul 2014
From: east sussex
Member No.: 71,587



No.

Schedule 4 of POFA is all about making the keeper liable, usually for the driver’s breach of contract, when he would not be liable under contract at common law. It doesn’t apply to railway station car parks which are not “relevant land” because the parking is subject to Byelaws.

The 14-day time limit is just one of hoops the PPC has to jump through in order to claim keeper liability. Obviously it’s irrelevant in your case.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bigden136
post Sat, 19 Jan 2019 - 22:46
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 40
Joined: 8 May 2014
Member No.: 70,507



Just to add to this situation -... it seems that PCN Admin Center or Indigo are sending out 2 Penlaty Notices for the same alleged offence:

Does this happen often as this is clearly a duplicate right?

Thanks for all your help form the contributors on this forum

Attached Image
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Sun, 20 Jan 2019 - 00:32
Post #16


Member


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



PCN Admin Centre is a trading name of ZZPS Ltd, a debt collector that Indigo employs to manage its appeal system

ZZPS is also contracted to pursue unpaid penalty notices including the appeals that it's rejected
It doesn't accept many appeals

It also pursues motorists that have won their appeals to ITAL, the independent body that's the second stage of the appeal process

This post has been edited by Redivi: Sun, 20 Jan 2019 - 00:33
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ollyfrog
post Sun, 20 Jan 2019 - 02:03
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 418
Joined: 22 Oct 2018
Member No.: 100,530



Are they trying to make 2 charges, 1 for each day since the parking event spans 2 days? One says 30th, the other says 31st. Looks like that to me. Have they totalled the 2 charges anywhere?

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bigden136
post Sun, 20 Jan 2019 - 15:35
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 40
Joined: 8 May 2014
Member No.: 70,507



All,


This is my first attempt to appeal the Penalty Notice.....I would appreciate feedback, Thanks

With reference to your penalty notice by post letter date 9th January 2019, highlighting that my vehicle had on the 18th December 2018, been recorded via their automatic number plate recognition system for
“Failing to obtain a valid ticket or voucher”.

Please note that as the registered keeper I wish to appeal this penalty notice and the charges therein on the following grounds:

1. The Notice to Keeper (NTK) was delivered outside of the relevant period specified under sub-paragraph 9 (5) of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA). The Notice to Keeper is not compliant with Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 as the NTK was delivered outside of the relevant period specified under sub-paragraph 9 (5) of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA). Sub-paragraph 9 (5) specifies that the relevant period for delivery of the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) for the purposes of sub-paragraph 9 (4) is a period of 14 days beginning with the day after that on which the specified period of parking ended. According to the PCN, the specified period of parking ended on Tuesday 18th December 2018.
The relevant period is therefore the 14-day period from: Wednesday 19th December 2018 to Tuesday 2nd January 2019 inclusive.
Sub-paragraph 9 (6) states that a notice sent by post is to be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, to have been delivered (and so “given” for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4)) on the second working day after the day on which it is posted; and for this purpose, “working day” means any day other than a Saturday, Sunday or a public holiday in England and Wales. The “Letter Date” stated on the Penalty Notice is Wednesday 9th January 2019, and in accordance with sub-paragraph 9 (6) is presumed to have been “given” on Monday 14th January 2019 which is way beyond the relevant period specified under sub-paragraph 9 (5) of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA).

2. As the registered keeper, I have no liability for this charge. Indigo Park Solutions Limited has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact the driver who may have been potentially liable for the charge. In cases with a keeper appellant, yet no POFA 'keeper liability' to rely upon, no presumption can be made about liability whatsoever. A vehicle can be driven by any person (with the consent of the owner) as long as the driver is insured. There is no dispute that the driver was entitled to drive the car and I can confirm that they were, but I am exercising my right not to name that person. In this case, no other party apart from an evidenced driver can be told to pay. I am the appellant throughout (as I am entitled to be), and as there has been no admission regarding who was driving, and no evidence has been produced, that a parking charge cannot be enforced against a keeper without a valid NTK. Additionally, as the keeper of the vehicle, it is my right to choose not to name the driver, yet still not be lawfully held liable if an operator is not using or complying with Schedule 4. This applies regardless of when the first appeal was made and regardless of whether a purported 'NTK' was served or not, because the fact remains I am only appealing as the keeper and ONLY Schedule 4 of the POFA (or evidence of who was driving) can cause a keeper appellant to be deemed to be the liable party.

The burden of proof rests with the Indigo Park Solutions UK Limited to show that (as an individual) I have personally not complied with terms in place on the land and show that I am personally liable for their parking charge.

3. The NTK does not warn the keeper that, if after a period of 28 days, Indigo Park Solutions UK Limited has the right to claim unpaid parking charges as specified under sub-paragraph 9 (2) (f) of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA). POFA 2012 requires that an operator can only establish the right to recover any unpaid parking charges from the keeper of a vehicle, if certain conditions are met. As sub-paragraph 9 (2) (f) highlights a NTK much adhere to the following points: The notice must be given by—
warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given—
(i) the amount of the unpaid parking charges specified under paragraph (d) has not been paid in full, and
(ii) the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver,
the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid;
Upon reviewing the NTK, Indigo Park Solutions UK Limited have omitted any mention of the conditions as outlined in sub-paragraph 9 (2) (f).

4. Indigo Park Solutions UK Limited lacks proprietary interest in the land and does not have the capacity to offer contracts or to bring a claim. It is suggested that Indigo Park Solutions Limited does not have proprietary interest in the land and merely acting as agents for the owner/occupier. Therefore, I ask that Indigo Park Solutions Limited. be asked to provide strict proof that they have the necessary authorisation at this location in the form of a signed and dated contract with the landowner, which specifically grants them the standing to make contracts with drivers and to pursue charges in their own name in the courts. Documentary evidence must pre-date the parking event in question and be in the form of genuine copy of the actual site agreement/contract with the landowner/occupier and not just a signed ‘witness statement’ slip of paper saying it exists.

5. Furthermore, Indigo’s website states that this car park is managed by Indigo Park Services UK Ltd, however, the penalty notice has been issued on behalf of Indigo Park Solutions Limited. It is therefore unclear whether either of these have proprietary interest in the land and therefore I would need proof that they have the capacity to offer contracts or to bring a claim.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cabbyman
post Sun, 20 Jan 2019 - 20:01
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,806
Joined: 15 Dec 2007
From: South of John O'Groats, north of Cape Town.
Member No.: 16,066



Too long, that's for the second stage appeal. If this is the first appeal to Indigo, to get a POPLA/ITAL appeal code.

Dear sirs,

ref xxxxx VRM xxx

I am the registered keeper of the above vehicle.

I am not liable for the above PCN because the land is NOT relevant land, as defined by Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, sched 4. You must therefore pursue the driver who I am not obliged to name.

I require you to cancel the charge or provide me with the means to appeal to POPLA where I will arrange for you to be instructed to cancel. I also require you to remove my personal data from your records.

Love and kisses.


Use the same method of sending as they used to notify you. First class post, but this time, obtain a certificate of posting from the Post Office Counter. Send to arrive on day 26.

This post has been edited by cabbyman: Sun, 20 Jan 2019 - 20:13


--------------------
Cabbyman 10 PPCs 0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bigden136
post Tue, 22 Jan 2019 - 00:01
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 40
Joined: 8 May 2014
Member No.: 70,507



I have another quick question....

If the PCN Admin Centre send a penalty notice that is within the 14 day time limit for the NTK is it harder to fight the charge?

...and what is the significance with respect to the Railway Byelaws?

Thanks
Den
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

5 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
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: Wednesday, 23rd October 2019 - 16:51
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.