PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Euro Car Parks ANPR PCN, Last couple of days for POPLA :(
Benny.T
post Wed, 11 Apr 2018 - 13:28
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 213
Joined: 2 Jun 2015
Member No.: 77,551



Hi all,

I am helping a friend of mine with their PCN received from ECP. Essentially, the car park 'rules' state that you must enter your reg number in the restaurant computer system as evidence you are visiting the restaurant. The person involved's vehicle was parked in the car park for approx. 30 minutes while they went into the restaurant, the was a long wait for tables, so ultimately went elsewhere (without entering their reg number)

ANPR PCN followed (see attached)

We did a robust appeal using advice for similar situations I had seen on Pepipoo, and received the automated response from ECP. So now we need a POPLA argument to use for that appeal.

I'm fairly certain that the initial PCN was non-compliant, but would like to have others' thoughts on the matter and what to include in the POPLA appeal

Thanks in advance!

Benny

This post has been edited by Benny.T: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 - 15:09
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
 

Attached File(s)
Attached File  PDF_Ticket_Redacted.pdf ( 223.48K ) Number of downloads: 30
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Wed, 11 Apr 2018 - 13:28
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
ostell
post Wed, 11 Apr 2018 - 13:58
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7,445
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



Looking at that PCN it looks as though they have failed to deliver the notice within the required 14 days for no windscreen ticket. If the keeper has not been identified then a simple bogoff appeal should have been sufficient.

Please confirm the time from parking to receipt of letter is more than 14 days.

It would probably help if you posted up the appeal, suitably redacted
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Benny.T
post Wed, 11 Apr 2018 - 14:14
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 213
Joined: 2 Jun 2015
Member No.: 77,551



Date of issue is the 10th Jan. Date of letter is 2nd Jan

Therefore time elapsed is 23 days plus delivery, if relevant

The photo scan is the first correspondence received. We have not named the driver or anyone else in the appeal. I'll try find it


Regarding POPLA appeal, do we simply write something to the effect of "NTK sent outside of the 14 day timeframe set out by POFA, therefore no keeper liability"?

QUOTE (ostell @ Wed, 11 Apr 2018 - 14:58) *
Looking at that PCN it looks as though they have failed to deliver the notice within the required 14 days for no windscreen ticket. If the keeper has not been identified then a simple bogoff appeal should have been sufficient.

Please confirm the time from parking to receipt of letter is more than 14 days.

It would probably help if you posted up the appeal, suitably redacted



We forgot to deal with this, so late on the final day had to do some googling and came up with this response:

Dear Sir, Formal Dispute - Parking Charge Notice XXXXXXXXXX Vehicle Registration XXXXXXX

I refer to the above-detailed Parking Charge Notice (“PCN”) issued to me by Euro Car Parks Ltd (“ECP”) as a Notice to Keeper. I confirm that I am the keeper of this vehicle for the purpose of the corresponding definition under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (“POFA”) and I write to formally dispute the validity of this PCN.

You will no doubt be familiar with the strict requirements of Schedule 4 of POFA to be followed in order for a parking operator to be able to claim unpaid parking charges from a vehicle’s keeper. However, there are a number of reasons why ECP’s Notice to Keeper did not comply with POFA; in order that you may understand why, I suggest that you carefully study the details of Schedule 4, Paragraph 9 in particular.


ECP has now forfeited its right to claim keeper liability. Therefore please confirm that you shall now cancel this charge or alternatively, should you still believe that you have a valid claim, please provide me with details of the Independent Appeals Service (POPLA), their contact details and a unique POPLA appeal reference so that I may escalate this dispute to POPLA. Thank you for your cooperation and I look forward to receiving your response within the relevant timescales specified under the British Parking Association Ltd Code of Practice. Yours faithfully,



I know probably not ideal, but do they even read the 'appeals'....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Benny.T
post Thu, 12 Apr 2018 - 10:31
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 213
Joined: 2 Jun 2015
Member No.: 77,551



Bumped as need to get POPLA in asap smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Thu, 12 Apr 2018 - 10:46
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7,445
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



So find yourself a POPLA appeal on here where the PCN was received outside of the 14 days.

The lack of POFA compliance will be your first item in the POPLA appeal

Post on here for critique first before you send. You send as a PDF attachement
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Benny.T
post Thu, 12 Apr 2018 - 13:36
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 213
Joined: 2 Jun 2015
Member No.: 77,551



Dear Sir

Ref *****

I am the registered keeper of this vehicle.

I note that the Parking Charge Notice was sent on 22/02/2018; 23 days after the date of the alleged events.

Euro Car Parks' position that POFA entitles them to hold me liable is therefore clearly untrue, as the Notice to Keeper was sent outside of the timeframe of 14 days set out by Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012:

"(4)The notice must be given by—
(a)handing it to the keeper, or leaving it at a current address for service for the keeper, within the relevant period; or
(b)sending it by post to a current address for service for the keeper so that it is delivered to that address within the relevant period.

(5)The relevant period for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4) is the period of 14 days beginning with the day after that on which the specified period of parking ended."

As such, I would appreciate if you can advise Euro Car Parks to cancel this parking charge notice, and pursue the matter with the driver, given that no Keeper Liability applies under Schedula 4 of the POFA 2012.

Yours Faithfully

Xxxxx
Registered Keeper of Xxxxxxx
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Thu, 12 Apr 2018 - 13:38
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 16,818
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



POFA states it must be received within 14 days.

Dont appreciate, dont ask them to advise. State that on this point alone the appealmust be upheld.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Benny.T
post Thu, 12 Apr 2018 - 13:58
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 213
Joined: 2 Jun 2015
Member No.: 77,551



Aren't POPLA unable to cancel a PCN though, merely advise the PPC to do so?


Regardless, I'll change that sentence to convey what you wrote. Thanks!

Is this single point of defence enough, or is there any possibility POPLA could decide against the RK?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Thu, 12 Apr 2018 - 14:13
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 16,818
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



No, their decision is binding. When they uphold an appeal, the PCN has to be cancelled.

It is very unlikely this would lose, however if you want to be sure add in every standard point found on basically every popla appeal. Your choice.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Benny.T
post Mon, 16 Apr 2018 - 21:30
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 213
Joined: 2 Jun 2015
Member No.: 77,551



They've gone and pulled a diddly on the RK - there is a new letter which was never received. If they can prove it was sent, does it meet the requirements to be a Notice to Keeper? What should we do? POPLA is still in the evidence processing stage

This post has been edited by Benny.T: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 - 21:34
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 06:46
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 16,818
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



You need to reiterate to POPLA that you never received this document, therefore it was never given as per POFA 2012 sched 4 para 9 and therefore cannot hold the keeper liable. Any presumption that the document WAS given is rebutted by your statement to that effect, which IS evidence. Unless the operator acan prove you to be lying, the appeal must be upheld.

You also state that, on the balance of probabilities, why would they send out TWO DOCUMETNS in such a short space of time? State you believe it is MUCH more likely that they missed their deadline to ensure the document could be received in time, and have mocked up this NtK to mislead POPLA. State you require strict proof in the form of a delivery receipt signed by someone in your household that this document was lawfully served.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 06:57
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7,445
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



Send POPLA the NTK you have and ask them to explain the discrepancy, and the rejection of your appeal as a date of issue is given as the 10th, cast doubt on the accuracy of their documentation. Yes and ask that they provide proof that it was sent. Was the one you received also in the documents sent? If not ask them to explain the discrepancy and why they are trying to deceive POPLA

It's too late now but you could try and mention the other POFA failures, like period of parking, and 0 (2) (e) is not correctly specified and the incorrect 9 (2) (f). Was there a creditor named, 9 (2) (h)?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 07:28
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 16,818
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Giood point actually!

OP: DO THEY STATE THIS IS THE ONLY NTK?!?!

If so then you need to say to POPLA that clearly they are trying to LIE to POPLA, by FALSIFYING this NtK which is clearly not the same as the document YOU HAVE and that we *really* hope you sent to POPLA! You sk them to compare the two and see that one is clearly a generated after the fact mock up, compared to thte REAL NtK you have and that you posted in your original post.

Then IF they state this is the only NtK you must complain tot he BPA about ECP attempting to defraud you and their lying to POPLA in order to try to get your appeal dismissed. State you require an URGENT explantion from the BPA of HOW they will sanciton ECP and HOW they will ensure this does not happen again. Yo uexpect a formal, thorough investigation and at the very least, suspension of ECP until this is finished. If they do not respond confirming this within 7 days, you will complain to the DVLA that the BPA is clearly unfit for purpose, and demanding they cease allowing ECP access to Keeper data - they, like UKPC did, are falsifying documents and you expect them to not be given access any longer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Benny.T
post Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 08:31
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 213
Joined: 2 Jun 2015
Member No.: 77,551



QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 07:46) *
You need to reiterate to POPLA that you never received this document, therefore it was never given as per POFA 2012 sched 4 para 9 and therefore cannot hold the keeper liable. Any presumption that the document WAS given is rebutted by your statement to that effect, which IS evidence. Unless the operator acan prove you to be lying, the appeal must be upheld.

You also state that, on the balance of probabilities, why would they send out TWO DOCUMETNS in such a short space of time? State you believe it is MUCH more likely that they missed their deadline to ensure the document could be received in time, and have mocked up this NtK to mislead POPLA. State you require strict proof in the form of a delivery receipt signed by someone in your household that this document was lawfully served.


That's a good point - the initial alleged "fake letter" stated that the RK has until 14/2/18 to name driver or pay up, and yet the only NTK ("real NTK") was dated 02/02/18! The "real NTK" states that the driver has not paid, therefore the RK is liable and has 28 days to pay. The two letters are of a different format; the "fake letter" appears to me to be POFA compliant and in the evidence they go to great length highlighting compliance, but in the "real letter" there are failures to comply, such as no period of parking (just a start time and an issue time, whereas "fake letter" has entry and exit time included


QUOTE (ostell @ Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 07:57) *
Send POPLA the NTK you have and ask them to explain the discrepancy, and the rejection of your appeal as a date of issue is given as the 10th, cast doubt on the accuracy of their documentation. Yes and ask that they provide proof that it was sent. Was the one you received also in the documents sent? If not ask them to explain the discrepancy and why they are trying to deceive POPLA

It's too late now but you could try and mention the other POFA failures, like period of parking, and 0 (2) (e) is not correctly specified and the incorrect 9 (2) (f). Was there a creditor named, 9 (2) (h)?


We only received the first document I posted up dated 2/2/18, and this new one dated 17/1/18 has now appeared in evidence! So we will request evidence that it was indeed delivered within the 14 days time frame

I'll have a look into the second bit you said later smile.gif


QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 08:28) *
Giood point actually!

OP: DO THEY STATE THIS IS THE ONLY NTK?!?!

If so then you need to say to POPLA that clearly they are trying to LIE to POPLA, by FALSIFYING this NtK which is clearly not the same as the document YOU HAVE and that we *really* hope you sent to POPLA! You sk them to compare the two and see that one is clearly a generated after the fact mock up, compared to thte REAL NtK you have and that you posted in your original post.

Then IF they state this is the only NtK you must complain tot he BPA about ECP attempting to defraud you and their lying to POPLA in order to try to get your appeal dismissed. State you require an URGENT explantion from the BPA of HOW they will sanciton ECP and HOW they will ensure this does not happen again. Yo uexpect a formal, thorough investigation and at the very least, suspension of ECP until this is finished. If they do not respond confirming this within 7 days, you will complain to the DVLA that the BPA is clearly unfit for purpose, and demanding they cease allowing ECP access to Keeper data - they, like UKPC did, are falsifying documents and you expect them to not be given access any longer.


Will make sure to emphasise that the "fake letter" was never received and that we want evidende of delivery. Will also make the point about it seeming like they aren't trying to defraud us by fabricating evidence or not actually sending it out in the first place
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Benny.T
post Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 09:42
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 213
Joined: 2 Jun 2015
Member No.: 77,551



Below is an extract from Euro Car Park's "Registered Keeper details and liability trail", in which I believe they are mis-representing the "fake letter" sent as being a Notice to Keeper, when in fact it was titled "Parking Charge Notice (PCN) and makes no reference to a "Notice to Keeper" - does this matter?

Our PCN (Parking Charge Notice) is the first communication with the registered keeper – this is referred
to as the Notice to Keeper or Notice to Owner.

The PCN (NTK/NTO) has been checked by both the BPA and the IPC and we have confirmation
that our PCN (NTK/NTO) and has been approved as compliant with POFA.

The PCN (NTK/NTO) has been checked by Gladstone’s Solicitors who specialise in assisting
private car park operators – legal advice and pre legal advice with regards signage and adhering
to POFA and both code of practice.

Please be advised once the registered keeper has been sent the PCN (NTK/NTO) if there is no
response, payment, appeal, serviceable address of the driver – ECP process a Notice To Keeper – this
is a “reminder letter” and sent in reference to the PCN (NTK/NTO) that has not been responded to.
If we are in receipt of a serviceable address of the driver – the PCN (NTK/NTO) is re-issued

If the registered keeper is in receipt of the PCN (NTK/NTO) and has passed to the driver and the driver
appeals – we will respond to the appeal strictly following the code and ensure any/all communication is
sent to the driver (we would not at this stage re-issue the PCN)

We have been advised that the above is standard practice for all private car park operators in regards
to PCN (NTK/NTO) issued on Automatic Number Plate Recognition car parks
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 09:43
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 16,818
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



I wouldnt say you want evidence it was delivered, just state that it is clear that this supposed-NTK is clearly NOT the document that you actually received, is of entirely different format, and thiat this is a clear attempt to mislead POPLA.

I would immediately complain to the BPA. State that this is of immediate, serious concern, as this is evidence of ANOTHER operator falsifying documents.

I wouldnt even say they never sent it in the first place - just that this seems to be completely and utterly fabricated to try to prove POFA compliance. I HOPE and you havent confirmed this but i HOPE you put your ORIGINAL REAL NtK in as evidence????
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Benny.T
post Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 10:05
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 213
Joined: 2 Jun 2015
Member No.: 77,551



QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 10:43) *
I wouldnt say you want evidence it was delivered, just state that it is clear that this supposed-NTK is clearly NOT the document that you actually received, is of entirely different format, and thiat this is a clear attempt to mislead POPLA.

I would immediately complain to the BPA. State that this is of immediate, serious concern, as this is evidence of ANOTHER operator falsifying documents.

I wouldnt even say they never sent it in the first place - just that this seems to be completely and utterly fabricated to try to prove POFA compliance. I HOPE and you havent confirmed this but i HOPE you put your ORIGINAL REAL NtK in as evidence????



Unfortunately we didn't, however a copy of it has been provided as part of ECP's evidence - so they have provided both the "fake" and the "real" letters in evidence

Not done a POPLA appeal before but know to upload the NTK in future!

I do think it's worth mentioning that we never received the original 'parking charge notice' from them, as well as suggesting at least proof of postage??

I'll also request DVLA to let us know when data was requested

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 10:14
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,831
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



This needs to go to trading standards for the attempted fraud.


--------------------
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 8-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Benny.T
post Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 10:36
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 213
Joined: 2 Jun 2015
Member No.: 77,551



How would you prove it as such? Surely I will have to put in the POPLA appeal thatbwe have never seen the 17/01/18 PCN, and therefore require the PPC to prove that it was sent/delivered within the 14 days?

This isn't my vehicle, but when the RK showed me the 02/02/18 NTK, I clarified with them whether or or they had received any prior correspondence regarding the alleged charges. They were adamant that nothing had been received, searched through all areas where post might have been, and found nothing from ECPs at all. I don't think they would have any reason to lie to me about what was received.

Can someone get back to me regarding the 17/01/18 letter and whether this constitutes a NTK please? Or is it just a PCN? Is there any difference?

Also, on the letter dated 17/01/18, it mentions that if after 29 days the parking charge isn't paid in full, RK is liable. Doesn't the POFA say it should be after 28 days? Is this a point that could mean if fails to invoke keeper liability, or is it just them giving extra time which is fine to do?

(f)warn the keeper that if, at the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to keeper is given—
(i)the amount of the unpaid parking charges (as specified under paragraph © or (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;


This post has been edited by Benny.T: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 10:46
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 10:56
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 16,818
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



The NtK IS the original PCN. There is only NtD and NTK, and NtD i only used when they put the notice on the windcreen - as that is a notice to the DRIVER at the time.

AGAIN DO NOT say "prove you sent it"

STATE TO POPLA THAT THIS IS A FRAUDULENT DOCUMENT

State that, as you NEER got the doucment until the Date X and it made no mention of being a rmeinder, and is of a different format entirely to the purported charge and INCLUDES the areas of POFA compliance you note are MISSING on the REAL NtK, you REQUIRE POPLA to DISREGARD the operators ervidence as AT BEST unreliable and AT WORST an attempt at FRAUD. Use those EXACT words.

A PCN is the Invoice, NtK just means ita a PCN addressed to the Keeper. the FRAUDULENT doc is indeed a "NtK" inso much as it is a document addressed to the keeper, but that isnt relevant - it was clearly never received and clearly just a FRAUDULENT attempt to mislead POPLA. POFA states 28 days starting with the day AFTER which the notice is given, which is 2 working days after posting it. So 29 days is of course wrong, but you dont discuss the FRAUDULENT NtK at all in detail, as if it was a real document.

Are you getting the hint yet???

This post has been edited by nosferatu1001: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 10:57
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
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: Tuesday, 17th July 2018 - 01:58
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.