Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: PCN via ANPR Premier Park Stone Lake retail park Charlton
FightBack Forums > Queries > Private Parking Tickets & Clamping
Memphis
We recently went shopping in a retail park just before the ULEZ expanded in London and a few days later got the following PCN through the post (addressed to the registered keeper who was not the driver at the time).

We've already attempted complaining via the retailer we shopped with to no avail, they have been unable to get any response from Premier Park via email or phone (or so they claim).

The particular retail park has the one sign at entry saying see others for T's & C's. It's the kind of thing you wouldn't look at as you're more concerned about the width restriction as you enter.

The remaining signs (from Google Streetview) appear to be set back within trees.

They allege we overstaid the max time which is 75 mins, by a whopping 11 mins.

Suggestions on how to deal with/what to do next?

dramaqueen
They can't go after the driver if they don't know who that was (presumably you haven't told them?).

Can they go after the keeper instead? Only if the Notice to keeper complies with the requirements of the Protection of Freedoms ct 2012 (POFA), shed 4, here: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9...edule/4/enacted. Paragraph 9 (2) lists the requirements from (a) to (i) - all of which MUST be satisfied if liability for the parking charge is to be transferred from driver to keeper. This notice to keeper fails in a number of ways. e.g. doesn't invite the keeper to pass the notice on to the driver.

First thing the keeper must do is appeal to Premier Park. Just a short letter, along the lines drafted by Ostell in other threads:

"Dear Sirs,

I acknowledge receipt of your Notice to Keeper xxxxx for vehicle VRM xxxx

You have failed to comply with the requirements of Schedule 4 of The Protection Of Freedoms Act 2012 including, but not limited to, the requirement to invite the keeper to pass the notice on to the driver as prescribed by paragraph 9(2)((e) (ii). You cannot, therefore, transfer liability for the alleged charge from the driver at the time to me, the keeper.

I am under no legal requirement to name the driver at the time and I will not be doing so.

I do not expect to hear from you again, or your debt collectors, except to confirm that no further action will be taken on this matter and my personal details have been removed from your records.

Yours etc


Send this out immediately, with free proof of posting. You're nearly out of time for the first appeal. Obviously, don't fall for their demand on the back of the NTK that all communications must contain the name and address of the driver.

This initial appeal will be rejected, but then you can appeal to POPLA where you should win. See this POPLA result posted on MSE recently on this thread: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discus...-decisions/p409

The wording on the Notice to Keeper was the same as yours.
Memphis
QUOTE (dramaqueen @ Mon, 22 Nov 2021 - 12:55) *
They can't go after the driver if they don't know who that was (presumably you haven't told them?).

Can they go after the keeper instead? Only if the Notice to keeper complies with the requirements of the Protection of Freedoms ct 2012 (POFA), shed 4, here: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9...edule/4/enacted. Paragraph 9 (2) lists the requirements from (a) to (i) - all of which MUST be satisfied if liability for the parking charge is to be transferred from driver to keeper. This notice to keeper fails in a number of ways. e.g. doesn't invite the keeper to pass the notice on to the driver.

First thing the keeper must do is appeal to Premier Park. Just a short letter, along the lines drafted by Ostell in other threads:

"Dear Sirs,

I acknowledge receipt of your Notice to Keeper xxxxx for vehicle VRM xxxx

You have failed to comply with the requirements of Schedule 4 of The Protection Of Freedoms Act 2012 including, but not limited to, the requirement to invite the keeper to pass the notice on to the driver as prescribed by paragraph 9(2)((e) (ii). You cannot, therefore, transfer liability for the alleged charge from the driver at the time to me, the keeper.

I am under no legal requirement to name the driver at the time and I will not be doing so.

I do not expect to hear from you again, or your debt collectors, except to confirm that no further action will be taken on this matter and my personal details have been removed from your records.

Yours etc


Send this out immediately, with free proof of posting. You're nearly out of time for the first appeal. Obviously, don't fall for their demand on the back of the NTK that all communications must contain the name and address of the driver.

This initial appeal will be rejected, but then you can appeal to POPLA where you should win. See this POPLA result posted on MSE recently on this thread: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discus...-decisions/p409

The wording on the Notice to Keeper was the same as yours.


Marvellous, thank you for that. I shall get that drafted today.

So for my own understanding, although they bleat on about "Tell us who the driver is" both on the front and reverse, because they don't actually request that the PCN is passed to the driver for them to deal with, that's why it is invalid?
dramaqueen
That's an over-simplification but basically, yes.

Under contract law, parking companies can only pursue the other party to the parking contract - namely, the driver. They don't know who that is. Hence the notice to keeper (which Premier call the Parking Charge Notice) tries to make you, the keeper, feel obliged to tell them. Don't fall for that little trick. Lots of people do - perhaps in the mistaken belief it's the same as the law for speeding tickets.

Under statute law, parking companies can transfer liability for the parking charge from the driver to the keeper provided that ALL the requirements set out in POFA 2012 Shed 4 are met. If the Notice is non-POFA complaint it isn't exactly invalid: it just means the operator cannot go after the keeper and is still stuck with trying to prove who was driving.

Premier Park's notice to keeper is substantially non-POFA-compliant. Not inviting the keeper to pass the notice on to the driver is just one of many failings. It was the one picked out by the POPLA assessor in the appeal reported on the link I gave you (Handbags-at-Dawn's post on MSE). It wasn't then necessary for him to consider all the others. When you get to the POPLA stage, you will need to list them all. You will also need to go into the other grounds of appeal (ie in addition to no keeper liability) such as poor signage. We can look at that when the time comes. But "no keeper liability" is your ace card.

Memphis
So, Premier Park ignored the letter they were sent and have not responded to it.

They sent out another reminder and after that have also sent the following letter.

Suggestions on next steps. This needs to go to POPLA I imagine but if PP are ignoring correspondence then how does that happen?

A copy of the Final Notice can be found here as I seem to have run out of space for uploading any more images:


https://ibb.co/kxQxKns

Suggestions on next steps? Yes I know it's more than a fortnight since their letter but we were on holiday and have only just gone through our post.
ostell
So you write to them and remind them that they have not responded to your appeal of the xxxx. Her is the proof of postage.

Basically they haven't complied with the requirements of 9 (2) (e) in not INVITING the keeper to pay or name the driver.
Memphis
Okay. How long do I give them to respond before I report them to the BPA for not following their code?
Memphis
So it appears that before we could send them a follow up, they've already passed details across to Debt Recovery Plus who have written to us about the alleged "debt".

Suggestions on next steps?

Have already logged a complaint with the BPA advising that the parking company has breached their code.

The BPA's response "we have no way of knowng what Premier Park may or may not have sent you, so we're not going to do anything at this point".

Honestly you couldn't make this rubbish up. biggrin.gif
DWMB2
Never converse with debt collectors. File but ignore their correspondence. Keep an eye out for any letter marked 'Letter Before Claim'/'Letter Before Action' etc.
Memphis
So the most recent letter from the debt collectors is supposedly from their "Legal Manager" and is described as;

TERMINAL NOTICE, PRE-LEGAL ACTION

Which states:

This is your pre-legal action warning before your case is handed to our legal team.


Etc.

Continue to file and ignore or send them a suitably worded "prove it or do one" type letter since their client ignored communications before this point?

Also, for my own education, where do I find POFA details that show they have to explicitly request the notice is handed to the driver else their actions are non compliant?
nosferatu1001
Pofa schedule 4 para 8 and para 9 contain this requirement. Read it. Google is your friend.

If it's debt collectors , ignore.
Memphis
Thanks, for the benefit of others, this can be found here:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9...edule/4/enacted

The wording is as follows:

(e)state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper—
(i)to pay the unpaid parking charges; or
(ii)if the keeper was not the driver of the vehicle, to notify the creditor of the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and to pass the notice on to the driver;

So by virtue of their original notice not inviting the keeper to pass the notice to the driver, they cannot rely on POFA.

What do I need to have ready if they actually commence legal proceedings or send an actual letter before action?
Redx
LBC ? = Email a SAR to the DPO at the parking company and issue a 30 days hold notice to the lawyers ( or Claimant if no lawyers ) whilst you seek debt management advice

Court claim via MCOL ? = Read the second post of the newbies FAQ sticky thread near the top of the forum at mse forums , in announcements , plus read and follow and use the Defence template post by coupon mad , again in announcement Study both carefully
nosferatu1001
There are dozens of threads where people are at court stage. Read them. That's the best way to prepare - get out of this thread and read read read.
DWMB2
The MSE thread mentioned by Redx above is essential reading for that stage. It'll also help you familiarise yourself with the defence points you can use.

Whilst POFA is one point you can use, you should have others. Don't tell us on this thread, but if the keeper was the driver, you also need to bear in mind the possibility of being asked in court "Were you the driver?". If the answer is "yes" then the lack of POFA compliance becomes irrelevant.
Memphis
Thanks.

Out of curiosity, why would one not send a "prrove it" letter to the debt collector in the knowledge that they can't?
DWMB2
Because the debt collector's job is not to prove anything. They're given your address by the parking company and told to seek payment of £X. If you don't pay, they'll eventually give up and pass it back to the parking company, who choose whether to take legal action.

Debt collectors are not interested in any letters you send them unless there's a cheque in the envelope.
nosferatu1001
QUOTE (Memphis @ Fri, 25 Mar 2022 - 16:13) *
Thanks.

Out of curiosity, why would one not send a "prrove it" letter to the debt collector in the knowledge that they can't?

Becsuse it's a waste of time effort and energy on everyone's part.
Redx
QUOTE (Memphis @ Fri, 25 Mar 2022 - 16:13) *
Thanks.

Out of curiosity, why would one not send a "prrove it" letter to the debt collector in the knowledge that they can't?

It is their client , the claimant parking company who has to "prove it" ! In civil court !

As mentioned above , the debt collector ( plus any lawyer acting for the claimant ) don't have to prove anything at all !
All they want is to scare you into a settlement for as much as possible from your bank account. So as mentioned above , if there is no cheque for the full amount attached , they are not interested whatsoever. There is nothing that you can say or do to change that business model. It's pay up , or else

What you need to realise is that this is a nothing stage , like 2 boxers squaring up and scowling , making threats etc , at the pre match weigh in ! Nothing gets sorted out until they are in the ring on fight day
Memphis
Yet another letter today from Debt Recovery Plus labeled as:

TERMINAL NOTICE

PRE-LEGAL ACTION

Any need to do anything as yet? This still isn't a letter before claim else it would state as much (plus they're not lawyers either).
nosferatu1001
No, of course not. It's garbage. Everything from drp is garbage.
Memphis
So now we've received a Letter Before Claim from Gladstones Solicitors on behalf of Premier Park. All in all, 11 months or so after the original alleged event.

Seems like the other half has opened this today and the reply has to be sent today. Would welcome guidance on how to approach given that they ignored the letter we sent them originally stating "not the driver". They never referred to POPLA and just went on their merry way until we've finally got here.
Redx
Post a redacted copy of the latest letter , on imgur or similar

There are plenty of replies on here explaining what to do with an LBC
Memphis
Redacted version of the letter available here:

Letter Part 1
Letter Part 2
Memphis
So after some digging I managed to track down the managing agents who contract Premier Park to manage parking on the site.

The managing agents are a company called Stiles Harold Williams .

I'm sure a quick Google search will turn up their relevant contact information if you feel like providing feedback on their chosen PCM.

The landowner apparently is a company called Weybourne Ltd. Again. Google, will be your friend.
Memphis
So in the meantime had been following up with retailer at the retail park and today the relevant manager has confirmed they received an email from Premier Park confirming that the PCN has been cancelled.

Shame I won't get to refer Gladstones to Arkell v Pressdram (1971). biggrin.gif
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2024 Invision Power Services, Inc.