PCN - notice from TNC parking services, Alleged parking outside a shop after hours Options

[chester45]

hi

we have just received a letter from TNC parking services saying we parked our car outside a showroom Palmers (bathrooms) on the 3rd Feb 2017 at 20.25

we have looked up Palmers and its based of in West Bridgford in Nottingham opposite the cricket ground

The letter is addressed to my partner but neither of us can really remember getting a ticket

I do play cricket over at Trent Bridge CC and would have been doing nets during last February and it would have been around that time.

I don't remember parking on their forecourt and certainly don't remember receiving a ticket.

I'm equally amazed that after 6x months I could receive a letter, this is the second, the first had so little detail on I dismissed it as a hoax

my partner who's name the letter is addressed to checked Palmers on the WEb to find the location

The letter states £100 Notice and £60 admin and clearly appeal time passed

How should I proceed, do I ignore or see if I can get evidence of parking

cheers Chester

[Advertisement]

[nosferatu1001]

When was the first one received?

If outside of 14 days (as nothing was on the car ) then the keepr cannot be liable, only the driver.

[chester45]

we did not have a ticket on the car and the first notice we had was about a month ago from TNC and its to the registered owner not driver

I've attached the letter

I'm assuming ignore

This post has been edited by chester45: Fri, 22 Sep 2017 - 17:31

Attached File(s)

 TNC___17_02_03.___Blank.pdf ( 533.85K ) Number of downloads: 378

 

[kommando]

Hopefully sorted by now.

This post has been edited by kommando: Fri, 22 Sep 2017 - 17:21

[nosferatu1001]

Remove that attachmen5 now. You’ve left every detail on

That isn’t the first letter, apparently they sent one previously?

This post has been edited by nosferatu1001: Sat, 23 Sep 2017 - 00:09

[cabbyman]

The original postal PCN would have been issued in February, if there was no windscreen ticket.

[chester45]

as my first post we haven't seen any letter apart from this one and one very similar which was only arrived a month ago

looking at other post it looks like there isn't a time limit for issuing parking tickets

[nosferatu1001]

There is a time limit, ONLY if they want to hold the keeper liable
If no windscreen ticket the limit is 14 days
If there was a windscreen ticket then between 29 and 56 days

Outside of these timescales there is no liability.

[chester45]

hi nosferatu1001

I have managed to find the original letter and its dated 18th August

so well outside the liability period

do I get the RK to reply as such or ignore it


 TNC___17_02_03___1v_Blank_.pdf ( 608.06K ) Number of downloads: 331

[nosferatu1001]

It even says non-POFA

To be reqasonable: reply back, stating their client has chosen not to use the provisions of POFA to hold you, the keeper of the vehicle liable.
As such you as Keeper have no liability in this matter, and they must chase the driver.

If the keeper can state they were NOT the driver, do so here!

[chester45]

Hi nosferatu1001

thank you for your advise

I'm assuming they can't force the RK to disclose who the driver is

appreciate your help

[cabbyman]

Dear sirs,

ref xxxxx

I am the registered keeper of the vehicle identified in the above. As you and your client have elected not to use the remedy available against the keeper in the Protection of Freedoms Act, I have no liability whatsoever in this matter and you should contact the driver.

Although I am not obliged to name the driver, I have passed on your letter and asked that they make direct contact with you.

I don't expect to hear from you or your client further in this matter save to confirm that I have no liability. Contact for any other reason will be regarded as improper use of my data and will result in a court claim against you of at least £250 in accordance with the decision in xxxx v yyyyy

Love and kisses.

Hopefully, someone else can come up with the case I am thinking of!!!

[nosferatu1001]

Vidal -hall vs Google.

Only add the last of you will file a claim.

[chester45]

hi cabbyman, nosferatu1001 & kommando

thanks for all your help

such a good forum and site

keep up the good work

cheers

[chester45]

hi

just received the "Notice of Intention to Summons from TNC

its addressed to the RK and not the driver

I'm assuming I ignore

the RK is a little spooked by the letter

your advice would be much appreciated

This post has been edited by chester45: Fri, 6 Oct 2017 - 15:01

[ostell]

So you respond in the same vein as in post #12, again refering to the fact that they have failed to to adhere to the requirements of POFA and cannot therefore hold the keeper liable, only the driver. Any claim that is raised will fail and you will be seeking full costs from them.

They are also, by continuing using the keeper details after the keeper has pointed out that there is no liability added to the stress and harrassment, contrary to the DPA.

[The Rookie]

Summons? Really? Bullying F*~@tards.

Contrary to the BPA CoP, they have no criminal case to summons you for so its claiming an authority they don't have, complain immediately.

My response would be to ask what criminal offence they think they can summons you for, its not in any way a compliant LBA so no need to respond as such and I'd disagree with Ostell on that, its just meant to be scary.

Dear F'tards
Thank you for your letter of the 29th of September, can you please clarify what criminal offence you intend to summons me for?

Regards
Chester

[nosferatu1001]

Indeed, misrepresentaiton of authority.

Alternatively, State that, as they are purporting this to be a letter before action, you REQUIRE they follow the pre-action protocol for Debt claims, and provide ALL documents as explicitly stated under that protocol. Failure to do so before instigating proceedings will result in application for a stay, at their clients expense, for the full costs while their fissures are remedied.

I would go down Rookies route however.

[kommando]

NA

This post has been edited by kommando: Sat, 7 Oct 2017 - 15:22

[adrivenotts]

Hi,

I was wondering whether this was resolved or not. I am in a very similar situation with the same 2 companies.

A driver, who will remain unidentified, received a PCN on the 4/3/19. After following advice from other forum feeds I contacted CPS midland to inform them that, as the registered keeper of the vehicle in question, I was not the driver at the time of the offence and would not be naming the driver.

They replied asking for me to name the driver, i did not respond.

I have since then received the NTK on the 18/5/19, although the NTK was dated the 9/5/19. The number of days between these 2 dates is 66, over the 56 days required to issue the NTK. I replied back to CPS, not TNC, informing them that i am not liable as keeper as the NTK was not issued in time, stating the exact piece of legislation.

I also asked for CPS to provide me with the 10 digit POPLA code.

I have since received further correspondence from TNC. Both of my correspondence from TNC appear almost identical to those documents provided within this thread.

Should i contact TNC? and if so, how should i respond?

Thanks in advance for any advice.

This post has been edited by adrivenotts: Thu, 13 Jun 2019 - 15:22