PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Britannia Parking
sez_005
post Fri, 23 Feb 2018 - 19:54
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6
Joined: 23 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,730



Hi. It’s been a while since I was last on here, so am just wondering if anything has changed much.

A friend of mine has today received a NTK in the post from Britannia Parking. Date of notice is 21st Feb and date of contravention 30th Jan.

Am I correct in assuming that as this is more than 14 days, they have not complied with the NTK rules set out in POFA? And therefore my friend should send a letter of appeal, as RK, based purely on their failure to comply? Or should my friend add something different/extra to the letter of appeal?

Any advice would be greatly appreciated!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 8)
Advertisement
post Fri, 23 Feb 2018 - 19:54
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Jlc
post Fri, 23 Feb 2018 - 20:14
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 41,503
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: Planet Earth
Member No.: 49,223



Indeed, that means they can only pursue the driver. I presume the NtK doesn't claim otherwise?

An 'appeal' that they've failed to comply and that the keeper has no liability. (If they reject then they have to give a POPLA code where they will uphold the appeal)


--------------------
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.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
sez_005
post Fri, 23 Feb 2018 - 20:48
Post #3


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6
Joined: 23 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,730



Thank you!

I only have a copy of the front of the NTK at the moment, but having checked that, it says...

“Please be advised that the driver of the motor vehicle is required to pay this parking charge in full. As we do not know the drivers name or current address, and if you were not the driver of the vehicle at the time, you should tell us the name and current postal address of the driver and pass this notice to them for payment.
If you were the driver at the time of the event you are required to pay or appeal the parking charge.”

So yes, they are pursuing the driver.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Fri, 23 Feb 2018 - 20:53
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 41,503
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: Planet Earth
Member No.: 49,223



QUOTE (sez_005 @ Fri, 23 Feb 2018 - 20:48) *
So yes, they are pursuing the driver.

Indeed, but they've written to the keeper and admit they have not complied with PoFA to pursue the keeper if they do not know or will not reveal the driver...

So, the initial appeal (as the keeper) tells them this.


--------------------
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.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
sez_005
post Fri, 23 Feb 2018 - 21:07
Post #5


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6
Joined: 23 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,730



Thank you. I would have very likely missed that point. I learnt from my own mistake a few years back, appealing as the driver and after subsequently discovering these forums, realising that wasn’t the best approach!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
sez_005
post Fri, 23 Feb 2018 - 23:27
Post #6


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6
Joined: 23 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,730



So is something like this ok as an initial appeal? Or does it need anything else?

Ticket number: XXXXXX
Vehicle registration number: XXXXXXX

On 21st February 2018 you issued a Parking Charge Notice, to me, as the Registered Keeper.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. Your Notice to Keeper is not compliant with Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Therefore you are unable to pursue me as the keeper. You must therefore cancel the charge, or offer me a POPLA code.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
sez_005
post Mon, 26 Feb 2018 - 10:42
Post #7


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6
Joined: 23 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,730



I do now have copies of the front and reverse of the PCN my friend received. Presumably I should just advise my friend to go with an appeal along the lines of the wording in my previous post?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Mon, 26 Feb 2018 - 12:16
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,088
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



And there is no mention of POFA either on the front or the back and no mention of keeper liability?

I have received your Notice to Keeper No. xxxx regarding vehicle XXXXX

You have failed to comply with the requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, namely, but not limited to, the statements that must be included in 9 (2). You cannot, therefore, hold me, the keeper, liable for the actions of the driver at the time. There is no legal requirement for me to identify the driver, and I will not be doing so. I do not expect to hear from you again about this matter, other than to confirm that no further action will be taken.


Don't bother asking for the POPLA code, if the reject they know they have to issue a POLA code. Failure to do so means that you complain to the BPA about them failing to follow the Code of Practise, to the detriment of the consumer.

This post has been edited by ostell: Mon, 26 Feb 2018 - 12:19
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
sez_005
post Mon, 26 Feb 2018 - 18:43
Post #9


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6
Joined: 23 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,730



Thank you for the amended wording - that looks better!

Yes, absolutely no mention of POFA or keeper liability.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

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: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 13:09
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.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here