Notice to Owner from Indigo |
Notice to Owner from Indigo |
Mon, 20 May 2019 - 08:24
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 37 Joined: 5 May 2011 Member No.: 46,402 |
Hi,
Indigo have sent this lovely letter.... They claim the vehicle was parked at Berkhamsted station. The driver confirms that the vehicle was not parked there at the time and date shown, and that it was parked elsewhere, for which a valid online ticket had been purchased. Therefore no ticket was displayed on the vehicle. The driver confirms that no penalty ticket / pcn was attached to the vehicle on the day. The letter arrived sometime between 8th and 17th May. What would be a suitable response? Simply that the vehicle wasn't parked at the location specified at the date/time? What timeframes are there for responding to such a letter ? Thanks This post has been edited by jonty4: Mon, 20 May 2019 - 08:45 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Mon, 20 May 2019 - 08:24
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Mon, 20 May 2019 - 08:45
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17,088 Joined: 8 Mar 2013 Member No.: 60,457 |
Can you get proof that a ticket was paid for elsewhere? Line from a card statement perhaps.
Point out that the car was not parked at that location at that time therefore there could not have been a ticket on the windscreen. Ask them to identify exactly which portion of Byelaw 14 was allegedly breached. Respond as late as possible to stretch out the time towards the 6 month limit for making a prosecution. Have you had a look at the pictures on their website? |
|
|
Mon, 20 May 2019 - 08:50
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 37 Joined: 5 May 2011 Member No.: 46,402 |
Driver has screenshot of online ticket purchase, and bank statement showing amount taken. Their website shows the vehicle concerned, with PCN on the windscreen. Location of photograph is where the vehicle was actually parked. When you say respond as late as possible, how long is that? 28 days ? Send letter back on say day 26 ? Thanks |
|
|
Mon, 20 May 2019 - 10:52
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 2,053 Joined: 20 May 2013 Member No.: 62,052 |
The car being parked elsewhere: is this
1) pendantry - in that the name of the car park given on the NtO was slightly different, but the car was nevertheless parked at "the station car park", or 2) that there are two car parks near the station an the ticket was issued for the other car park? If so, are they both operated by Indigo? Can you explain further? |
|
|
Mon, 20 May 2019 - 11:46
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 37 Joined: 5 May 2011 Member No.: 46,402 |
The car being parked elsewhere: is this 1) pendantry - in that the name of the car park given on the NtO was slightly different, but the car was nevertheless parked at "the station car park", or 2) that there are two car parks near the station an the ticket was issued for the other car park? If so, are they both operated by Indigo? Can you explain further? Neither - the car was parked at a totally different station, for which the driver had purchased, online, a parking ticket that was valid at the date/time of the alleged parking offence. The aforementioned photo, accessible via their website, does show the correct vehicle, at the location it was actually parked. Thanks |
|
|
Mon, 20 May 2019 - 19:54
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,126 Joined: 31 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,238 |
I've seen this before from Indigo - photos and a parking notice for another station
I would wait until near the deadline and send a simple appeal that the car was not the location ZZPS, the debt collector that runs the appeal process will have to send the code for a second appeal This will cost them about £30 when you use it That's the time to produce evidence that the car was elsewhere |
|
|
Mon, 20 May 2019 - 20:18
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 37 Joined: 5 May 2011 Member No.: 46,402 |
Redivi, thanks for your reply.
I am still unsure what the deadline is? There doesn't seem to be any mention of it in the letter, unless I've missed something ?? So, a letter will be sent to them as suggested, with no further information offered, and nothing they don't already know. |
|
|
Tue, 21 May 2019 - 14:32
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 162 Joined: 14 Dec 2018 From: Sussex Member No.: 101,446 |
It looks to me as if the registered keeper hasn’t received the first notice to keeper so hasn’t had the chance to appeal and then do the second appeal. If I were you, I’d write to Indigo saying the car was not at the station claimed, it was at another, as shown in their photo and that parking was paid for. Hang on to the ticket you paid for.
They’ll probably ignore what you say and continue to send you threatening letters which you should ignore. You could send a complaint to the BPA, who get lots about Indigo. Then ignore all letters from ZZPS unless they name a date in court which is almost unheard of. -------------------- “Nobody leaves their house because they want to go and do some parking; parking is simply a means to an end, and it should be as easy as possible.” Rishi Sunak, MP
|
|
|
Fri, 24 May 2019 - 19:36
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 37 Joined: 5 May 2011 Member No.: 46,402 |
Letter sent to Indigo/ZZPS - I shall post up any reply received.
Thanks for your help. |
|
|
Fri, 24 May 2019 - 22:36
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,124 Joined: 8 Feb 2013 Member No.: 59,842 |
This thread (and its links) from MoneySavingExpert might be of interest.
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showth...ighlight=indigo |
|
|
Sat, 25 May 2019 - 07:48
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17,088 Joined: 8 Mar 2013 Member No.: 60,457 |
I missed it originally but they are accusing the driver of "Failing to Display". There is no such offence under byelaw 14. A good excuse to do the letter ping pong until the 6 months is up getting them to define exactly what part of byelaw 14 has been breached as you cannot find "Failing to Display".
This post has been edited by ostell: Sat, 25 May 2019 - 07:50 |
|
|
Mon, 27 May 2019 - 12:06
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 37 Joined: 5 May 2011 Member No.: 46,402 |
Ostell, thanks - and that could well be the course of action.
|
|
|
Mon, 3 Jun 2019 - 16:06
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 37 Joined: 5 May 2011 Member No.: 46,402 |
A reply was received today.
Letter dated 23 May, posted 1 June according to envelope post mark. I will scan the letter this evening, redact and then post up here. (now linked) The main content is that they acknowledge the letter to them, they are pursuing this on behalf of their client "Saba Park Solutions UK Ltd" and that an offence was committed by breaching Railway Byelaw 14 hence a Penalty was issued. They are insisting the "owner" is fully liable, and given me 10 days to pay up. Edited - image is here (Imageshack doesn't seem to be rendering the image correctly at the moment - will see if I can re-upload it....) Interesting that date they claim to send the letter, is several days before the date they claim to have received the letter to them. Thanks This post has been edited by jonty4: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 - 17:26 |
|
|
Mon, 3 Jun 2019 - 17:02
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17,088 Joined: 8 Mar 2013 Member No.: 60,457 |
So have they actually answered your question about which section of byelaws 14? If not respond to them and ask them to answer you queries. You could also ask them how you, the keeper are liable when they have stated that the owner is liable.
Just to get you to 6 months |
|
|
Mon, 3 Jun 2019 - 18:57
Post
#15
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 37 Joined: 5 May 2011 Member No.: 46,402 |
So have they actually answered your question about which section of byelaws 14? If not respond to them and ask them to answer you queries. You could also ask them how you, the keeper are liable when they have stated that the owner is liable. No, of course not, they have just acknowledged a letter was sent, and confirm section 14 was breached. Although they say 10 days to reply, when would be the best time for a reply to be sent, around day 26 again? - and does that time start from the day the letter was received ? Of course, if they had taken time to read the letter sent to them, they would realise there is no point in continuing the course of action they have embarked upon.... Thanks |
|
|
Sun, 9 Jun 2019 - 20:39
Post
#16
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 37 Joined: 5 May 2011 Member No.: 46,402 |
Here is the proposed reply:
Dear Sirs Ref xxxxx The only correspondence received has been your letter of 1 May 2019, and your reply dated 23rd May (Received 1st June). No correspondance has ever been received from your client directly, and no ticket was affixed to the vehicle. Please can you confirm which section of Railway Byelaw 14 is alleged to have been breached. The driver confirms that the vehicle was not parked at the location mentioned on the date/time specified. Yours sincerely. Does that sound OK? When should this be sent back ? Thanks |
|
|
Sun, 9 Jun 2019 - 20:50
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 488 Joined: 21 Aug 2016 Member No.: 86,563 |
The original letter makes it abundantly clear that the "penalty" is an offer to avoid prosecution. They "invite" you to accept their offer. Well, kind of them, but you should decline this offer. Nobody (owner, driver, keeper, my cat) has any legal obligation to pay their charge. You should exercise your legal right to wait to be prosecuted. If they don't do this within 6 months, the opportunity for a prosecution expires. They never do prosecute because they won't get any money back. Instead, they might threaten to summons you to a Magistrate's Court for non-payment of a civil debt. But there is no civil debt, so it would be hard for them to win such a summons if it were to be defended properly.
|
|
|
Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 09:06
Post
#18
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 37 Joined: 5 May 2011 Member No.: 46,402 |
|
|
|
Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 09:27
Post
#19
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 2,053 Joined: 20 May 2013 Member No.: 62,052 |
Just keep the ping pong going. Wait say 3 weeks and then write and ask them whether the "debt" is an offer to avoid prosecution.
|
|
|
Sun, 7 Jul 2019 - 08:41
Post
#20
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 37 Joined: 5 May 2011 Member No.: 46,402 |
Have now received another letter - approx 2 weeks after last one... no reply had been sent to ZZPS since last letter.
They claim that they have not been "engaged" - yet they clearly failed to read any previous replies to them. Is it worth replying to this one sooner? How likely are they to take court action - given that no offence took place ? In an earlier letter they claim that if the debt goes unpaid - they will clamp the vehicle if found to be parked in one of their carparks - is this an empty threat ? As such an action would be very inconvenient for the driver. Thanks |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 16:57 |