"Parking infringement" at Lichfield Trent Valley 24 January 2018 |
"Parking infringement" at Lichfield Trent Valley 24 January 2018 |
Sun, 18 Feb 2018 - 20:53
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17 Joined: 16 Feb 2018 Member No.: 96,591 |
Apologies if this looks like the many other posts on this forum, but having felt very clear over what to do I am now feeling somewhat confused.
The driver parked for two days at Lichfield Trent Valley Station with two one-day tickets bought online the night before. When the driver got to the station there were no spaces, so parked at the end of a row, between one car in a bay and one car beyond the end of the row. There were many cars parked as in the same way, either single or double parked outside of marked spaces. On the driver's return on the evening of the second day there was a "Penalty Notice" from Indigo Parking Solutions on the windscreen, quoting Rail Bylaw 14, giving as a reason Breach Code 3 - Parked in an unauthorised area. Looking around there were a few cars with Penalty Notices, but even more not in marked bays without Penalty Notices. The driver photographed four of the cars without Penalty Notices, hopefully in such a way as not to show the number plates, but to show the lack of bay markings. That appears to show a complete lack of regard for any losses that the company may have suffered. The rear of the Penalty Notice states that "Disputes pertaining to the aforementioned appeals process maybe (sic) referred to the "Parking on Private Land Appeal Service". However, as I was paying for the tickets, I spotted a notice in passing, not obvious so don't know why I spotted it, that POPLA doesn't apply to this car park. When challenging the "Penalty Notice", I was going to use the template on the MSE Newbie Thread duly modified, see below. Re Penalty Notice number: I am the keeper of the vehicle which received this purported "Penalty Notice". There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. I am not liable and I believe that your signs fail the test of "large lettering" and prominence, as established in ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis. Your unremarkable and obscure signs are in small print and the onerous terms are not readable. Should you fail to cancel this PCN immediately, I require the following information with your template rejection: 1. Does your charge represent damages for breach of contract? Answer yes or no. 2. Please provide dated photos of the signs that you say were on site, which you contend formed a contract 3. Please provide all photographs taken of this vehicle. I am alarmed by your contact and I do not give you consent to process any data relating to me, or this vehicle. I deny liability and will not respond to debt collectors. You must consider this letter a Section 10 Notice under the DPA, and should you fail to respond accordingly, your company will be reported to the Information Commissioner. I have kept proof of submission of this appeal and will also be making a formal complaint to your client landowner. If you are a current BPA member, send me a POPLA code. If you are an IPC firm, cease and desist with all contact. Yours faithfully,[/i] Name and address of Registered Keeper As I bought the ticket online, how relevant is this to the driver concerned? I cannot see the relevance of the notices in the car park, although there are no clear signs on the way in. In light of the post from Dramaqueen in the Flamepit on Indigo Parking's use of the DVLA and subsequent discussions I decided not to wait for the NTK see link below: http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showto...p;#entry1352640 . I don't know if it's relevant, the car park shown on the website is the one on the northbound trackside. The car was parked on the car park on the southbound trackside. The tickets that are available for purchase both online and on the station seem to be accepted for both car parks, although the online ticket states it is for the Station Approach car park, i.e. on the northbound side. I looked at Lynnzer's example "dispute" letter but as the dispute seems to be at a different stage it can't be used. Any help would be appreciated. Deadline for submission of the dispute on the suggested timescales is tomorrow, Monday 19 February. I think I have been puzzling over this for too long so my request is a bit late. Sorry. This post has been edited by reluctantdecorator: Mon, 19 Feb 2018 - 17:12 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Sun, 18 Feb 2018 - 20:53
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Sun, 18 Feb 2018 - 21:07
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,905 Joined: 11 Jul 2010 Member No.: 38,904 |
Post the PCN - both sides - removing personal details, car reg, PCN number
|
|
|
Sun, 18 Feb 2018 - 21:20
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,508 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
The terms of purchasing a ticket states that a parking space is not guaranteed. 'Loss' is not a consideration, more so with a byelaw offence. (Other cars not having notices doesn't matter)
As they've stated it's a byelaw matter then there's 6 months to start a criminal prosecution. Usual advice is to stretch it past this date. -------------------- 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. |
|
|
Sun, 18 Feb 2018 - 21:44
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17,088 Joined: 8 Mar 2013 Member No.: 60,457 |
And edit your first post so that the identity of the driver cannot be inferred. They would just love to know the driver so that they can go after them. Use "the driver ...." etc. You have killed the first line of your suggested appeal.
Search around for other threads about indigo and railways. The intention is to keep up a letter pingpong for 6 months so wait for the postal Notice to Keeper. Then keep up a letter ping pong for 6 months. |
|
|
Sun, 18 Feb 2018 - 21:59
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,126 Joined: 31 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,238 |
There's a much easier approach
Your wife does nothing for now but waits for Indigo to write to her It could be a long wait My understanding is that Indigo is no longer contacting the DVLA for keeper information when railway Penalty Notices are involved If a letter does arrive, she should ask the DVLA who requested the details She then challenges ("appeal" is the wrong mindset) as the registered keeper as late as possible Dear Sir Ref **** I am the registered keeper of this vehicle I was not the driver Neither am I its owner I have no liability in this matter and will not under any circumstances make the payment you have demanded Yours Faithfully POPLA doesn't deal with Railway Byelaw notices The ICO doesn't regard the processing of information for recovery of a disputed debt as a breach of the DPA Indigo will pass the account to ZZPS, its debt collector, that will write two or three times ZZPS can be ignored ZZPS will eventually pass it on to its solicitor, Wright Hassall or QDR (they're the same company) When the time comes, we can draft a suitable reply to WH/QDR The strategy is to keep the Notice in orbit for six months when it will be impossible for anyone to be prosecuted She can then tell the companies that the matter is closed |
|
|
Mon, 19 Feb 2018 - 09:29
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17 Joined: 16 Feb 2018 Member No.: 96,591 |
Many thanks to all of you have responded, especially to remind a newbie like myself about the rookie mistakes which hopefully I have corrected!
I have now uploaded the "Penalty Notice" as suggested. This post has been edited by reluctantdecorator: Mon, 19 Feb 2018 - 11:46
Attached File(s)
|
|
|
Mon, 19 Feb 2018 - 09:36
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17,088 Joined: 8 Mar 2013 Member No.: 60,457 |
Read the "Read this First" thread that is in the stickies. You post on a free picture hosting site then post the link on this site. Photobucket not recommended at the moment.
|
|
|
Mon, 19 Feb 2018 - 17:09
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17 Joined: 16 Feb 2018 Member No.: 96,591 |
Thank you all again for your support. As Reidivi has suggested, my wife is now awaiting the NTK, whenever it may appear, fingers crossed it never does!! However, Dramaqueen seems to have identified a loophole or two that Indigo have been using to get Registered Owner details as far as I can see.
Just a few questions arising from the responses to my original post. Thanks Makara, I have posted the Penalty Notice - both sides. It took me a while to get the file size down but I got there. Does it show anything that gives a different pointer? Jlc's comment about a loss has raised a question with me about the "contract" with the parking operator. Why are they selling something they appear to have no intention of supplying, i.e. as a customer we pay in advance but they state that they make no effort to guarantee a space for us when we get there? Is that fraud, is it breach of contract, what is it? Many thanks Ostell, I have done a substantial edit and hope it is now a more anonymous but still clear version of what I was trying to describe and then ask. Thanks too for your suggestion on how to post a large file. Fortunately I managed to reduce the size and get it on the original post. The other question I had was around the POPLA process reference indicated on the back of the "Penalty Notice" when as I now know, POPLA does not apply in cases on Railway Land. What is going on? Needless to say I will be cancelling my account with Indigo and won't be buying a ticket online again. This post has been edited by reluctantdecorator: Mon, 19 Feb 2018 - 17:16 |
|
|
Mon, 19 Feb 2018 - 18:47
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,508 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
Jlc's comment about a loss has raised a question with me about the "contract" with the parking operator. Why are they selling something they appear to have no intention of supplying, i.e. as a customer we pay in advance but they state that they make no effort to guarantee a space for us when we get there? Is that fraud, is it breach of contract, what is it? It's quite a normal term: QUOTE 17.2 The use of the Parking Services is only valid for the vehicle specified in the accepted booking request. However, this does not entitle you to any particular space in the car park or guarantee there is a space in the car park at all. And QUOTE 1.6.3 In some cases, you may be subject to byelaws or parking regulations depending on the type and location of parking space you are using. It is your responsibility to ensure you comply with all applicable laws. Clause 14 covers refunds - here. My point about loss is that a byelaw ticket has no consideration of monetary loss - it is a penalty. Even for a contractual breach / charge, such loss may well be irrelevant following ParkingEye v Beavis. -------------------- 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. |
|
|
Thu, 22 Mar 2018 - 19:59
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17 Joined: 16 Feb 2018 Member No.: 96,591 |
My wife has finally received the Notice to Owner, seems to no longer be a Notice to Keeper. A copy is attached. It was sent on 28 February but it arrived while we were away and we have just opened it.
It seems that Indigo or their agent are in contact with DVLA again, so as suggested she will be asking them who requested the Registered Keeper Information. In the meantime she will be challenging their letter by email on 26 March using the suggested response given by Redivi, see below: Dear Sir Ref **** I am the registered keeper of this vehicle I was not the driver Neither am I its owner I have no liability in this matter and will not under any circumstances make the payment you have demanded Yours Faithfully Hopefully this is still a valid challenge. However, sorry to ask, but who does she send the challenge to, Indigo or ZZPS who sent the letter?
Attached File(s)
|
|
|
Fri, 23 Mar 2018 - 02:32
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,126 Joined: 31 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,238 |
I would address it to PCN Admin Centre Indigo
|
|
|
Thu, 26 Apr 2018 - 14:08
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17 Joined: 16 Feb 2018 Member No.: 96,591 |
Thanks again for your help.
My wife sent an email with the copy suggested to the PCN Admin Centre which went unacknowledged. She then for safety sent a registered letter with the same copy to the PCN Admin Centre. Again it has not been acknowledged, copy below. PCN Admin Centre INDIGO Bacchus House 1 Station Road Addlestone Surrey KT15 2AG 25 March 2018 Dear Sir, Re: Notice to Owner - Penalty Notice Number "Quoted from their letter" Dear Sirs, Ref: - "Given in their letter" I am the registered keeper of this vehicle. I was not the driver. Neither am I its owner. I have no liability in this matter and will not under any circumstances make the payment you have demanded. Yours faithfully, Signed We have been away, but on our return the attached was awaiting us from ZZPS, dated 11 April. Any suggestions on her next move would be very welcome, please This post has been edited by reluctantdecorator: Sat, 28 Apr 2018 - 19:06
Attached File(s)
|
|
|
Thu, 26 Apr 2018 - 14:14
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,508 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
You'll want to redact all of those personal details.
By 'resolve' they mean for you to pay it... They won't entertain any other discussion. -------------------- 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. |
|
|
Thu, 26 Apr 2018 - 15:23
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 9,985 Joined: 20 Aug 2008 Member No.: 21,992 |
Did the DVLA come back with who had requested the data?
-------------------- Sometimes I use big words I don't understand in an effort to make myself sound more photosynthesis.
|
|
|
Thu, 26 Apr 2018 - 16:39
Post
#15
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,167 Joined: 6 Oct 2012 Member No.: 57,558 |
No need for registered post, first class at the counter and ask for proof of posting, some PPC's prefer not to sign for anything and then you have no proof of delivery. First class is deemed serviced 2 working days later.
|
|
|
Sat, 28 Apr 2018 - 12:22
Post
#16
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17 Joined: 16 Feb 2018 Member No.: 96,591 |
We hadn't thought of that point kommando, thanks and we will now follow your guidance.
Thanks for the reminder Jlc, I think I was a bit tired after a long two day journey. In response to your question, ManxEd, we have been dealing with the DVLA largely from overseas and seem to have been given the runaround, although it doesn't appear to be intentional. They just don't seem to know what they are doing. What that means though is that my wife hasn't yet got an answer as to who made the request. The routes to the information that she has been given don't work and aren't valid. We have wasted a load of time and effort up to now. How should she go about asking DVLA in a way that will result in a "real answer"? |
|
|
Sat, 28 Apr 2018 - 17:43
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 18,751 Joined: 20 Sep 2009 Member No.: 32,130 |
|
|
|
Sat, 28 Apr 2018 - 19:21
Post
#18
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17 Joined: 16 Feb 2018 Member No.: 96,591 |
ZZPS have followed up the 11 April "unpaid penalty" letter with an "unpaid charge" letter dated 25 April, copy attached, which arrived today.
This is the letter suggesting they will pursue a private criminal prosecution and threatening a referral to QDR Solicitors. What are my wife's timescales and suggested response, if she should respond at all? Should she refer to her earlier correspondence? Any suggestions would be appreciated. Thanks SchoolRunMum, the letter will be on its way tomorrow!!
Attached File(s)
|
|
|
Sat, 28 Apr 2018 - 19:48
Post
#19
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,126 Joined: 31 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,238 |
I personally wouldn't bother to reply until at least the second QDR letter
|
|
|
Mon, 30 Apr 2018 - 07:13
Post
#20
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,687 Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Member No.: 15,642 |
They can threaten, they have never actually carried out that threat. The costs are far higher than SCC, they have no costs protection should you win, and they literally get nothing from the result.
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 20:26 |