Doncaster Airport - PCN LBC |
Doncaster Airport - PCN LBC |
Wed, 10 Oct 2018 - 10:19
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 10 Joined: 10 Oct 2018 Member No.: 100,312 |
Hi everyone,
I've been reading on this forum as well as MoneySavingExpert and I've found everything very helpful. Having said that, this whole issue is incredibly complex and confusing (at least for a simple fella like me). Anyhoo - here is my situation up to now: The driver of my car spent less than a minute on double-yellow lines in an area just outside Robin Hood Airport with plenty of space around, on a road/at a time where you'll spot another car once every few minutes. It just so happened, though, that a traffic control vehicle stopped on the other side of the road right at the same time to take these photos/put this charge through. So to clarify, I - as keeper - received a PCN, there was no ticket on the windscreen. For what it's worth, the reason for stopping was that the driver was about to join the motorway and there was a warning light on the dashboard. The driver felt that this area was a much safer place to perform a check, rather than on the motorway. I responded to the PCN using a template provided on the MoneySavingExpert board and have since received further demands including a statement that they can go after me as registered keeper. I also received a link to a video of the incident. Cleverly they stopped the video just before the car pulled away (all within around 50 seconds total). I've ignored all further correspondence up until now that I have received a Letter Before Claim. Since receiving that I've been reading up some more and have come up with some sort of a draft response. I would be grateful if those in the know could take a look at it and make suggestions or rip it to pieces if need be. I must add that I did copy some parts based on a user, SkipO, who has a similar issue to mine. But here it is: "Litigation & Debt Department Vehicle Control Services Limited, Unit 2 Europa Court , Sheffield Business Park, Sheffield, S9 1XE Dear Jake, I am in receipt of your letter, reference Letter Before Claim dated 20th September, 2018. I strongly reject your claim and am completely bemused at the idea that any terms and conditions could have been breached as at no point were any accepted or even requested to be accepted. A few things I would like to point out: • Although your letter is headed LETTER BEFORE CLAIM, it does not conform to the PAP for Debts guide and regulations. • Looking at the video evidence sent to me by you or a member of your team in an earlier correspondence, I see my vehicle pulled up for a duration of under one minute with hazard lights turned on, suggesting the driver had good reason to come to a temporary stop. This is fully allowed and permitted in the byelaws: " 5(3) Obstruction except in an emergency, leave or park a Vehicle or cause it to wait for a period in excess of the permitted time in an area where the period of waiting is restricted by Notice." • Nor the driver or any passenger leaves or enters the car within this short stop. • Further, the original PCN is a parking charge and the Contravention reason: is 46) STOPPING IN A ZONE WHERE STOPPING IS PROHIBITED. Therefore, there is no liability accrued to the keeper under POFA, which is strictly limited to parking matters. Furthermore, the land is Not Relevant Land for the purposes of POFA and therefore can NEVER be any liability to the keeper. • I've since looked at the signage on the road, of which this claim is based, and as far as I'm concerned, this is not signage I have ever been asked to keep an eye out for whilst driving and I imagine the same would go for the driver of the vehicle. If at any point the need for me to further investigate this matter, I am sure I will find that there are many reasons why these signs are not legitimate. • It is stated that this road is private, therefore you/the landowner can claim whatever you/they like. Yet it is quite clearly a public thoroughfare regularly used as access to not only an international airport but also a number of businesses and even a school. • If the reasoning for this request for payment is because of any potential obstruction caused by the vehicle in this moment, then it must be pointed out that the person taking this video used as evidence is quite clearly causing a similar level of obstruction on the other side of the road. This 'charge' is at best opportunist and obscene and must be cancelled. It is a cause of unnecessary stress and a waste of time for everyone involved. Any attempt to pursue through the court will result in an application to strike out for a no cause of action against the keeper OR any possible driver, and there will be no costs protection available to your client. I will pursue for full costs at £19 per hour. Regards, Registered Vehicle Keeper" This post has been edited by Even_Key: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 - 10:21 |
|
|
Thu, 20 Dec 2018 - 17:03
Post
#21
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 10 Joined: 10 Oct 2018 Member No.: 100,312 |
Right, thanks.
|
|
|
Advertisement |
Thu, 20 Dec 2018 - 17:03
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Thu, 20 Dec 2018 - 17:31
Post
#22
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,687 Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Member No.: 15,642 |
Do it online, now. No delaying else you will forget.
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 14:24 |