Evening all.

Ok,before I go any further I just wanted to check something.

Had an invoice from the above.

Date of alleged offence was early March.

Only yesterday did I receive any paperwork.

Isn't there a time limit as to when they can chase?

Cheers!

Was this a windscreen ticket or ANPR capture

the details you are not puting up effect the advice that can be given

ANPR. Sorry, not back home yet so unable to post any further info until later.

14 days they have to send a Notice to Keeper

Appeal back saying, I was not the driver and also that the notice is out of time. Please cancel this invoice or supply a Popla Code

Fantastic. Thank you SabreSheep!

let others confirm or contradict me though, private parking is not my normal area

With ANPR, Parking Lie have 14 days to contact the keeper unless the car is a company car where the keeper is different to you. That gives them a little bit longer but certainly not the amount of time that has passed.

Don't be too surprised that they will reject your appeal and when it gets to POPLA, they offer no evidence.

ANPR = Within 14 days

Windscreen NTD = Between 29 and 56 days

Anything else is non compliant with POFA and they lose the right to chase the keeper. Usually doesn't stop them from trying though.

Afternoon all.

Quick update. Our friends have unsurprisingly rejected my appeal and given me a POPLA code.

Just out of interest, what regs can I quote on my appeal to POPLA? Is there anything in particular I can cite?

Cheers!

Afternoon all.

Quick update. Our friends have unsurprisingly rejected my appeal and given me a POPLA code.

Just out of interest, what regs can I quote on my appeal to POPLA? Is there anything in particular I can cite?

Cheers!

From the limited information you have given us, all you need to state is that as RK you are not liable for the charge.

The scrict protocols of Schedule 4 of the POFA 2012 have not been met.

But without the full story then you may need to add more...

Your appeal should say the same, that as the first contact from PE was xx days after the alleged event and PE have not provided evidence that they did issue a demand that is complaint with the PoFA for keeper liability then you as keeper are not liable and have no interest in the matter.

Send by post, that way if PE send in paperwork that they claim they sent out (some parking co's have a habit of inventing GHOST paperwork just to get round the law) then you can send in more material within the time. If you use the online service you will get timed out for further submissions fairly quickly.

Hi all. Thank you for your advice so far...and apologies for resurrecting an old post.

I didn't respond to the POPLA letter and appeal...I know, me bad.

after not hearing anything from them since,

today I've had a lovely threatogram from our friends giving me 14 days to respond before court action.

What to do now...?

Their letter states a sort of out of court 'without prejudice' scenario that can be used.

Any ideas would be very welcome and grateful. DD

Another thing to add....my car part of a work salary sacrifice scheme so I'm not the owner per say. Am I still ok in terms of them sending me the NTK out of time?

you ignore them.

bet it doesn't say WILL anywhere.

dx

Be careful if you decide to ignore parking eye. They usually do issue a claim.

yes ofcourse don't ignore a claim form but for march 2015

we've not seem any

but they do think since the beavis case they are invincible!

There was a recent case (reported on Parking Prankster's blog) where the judge decided that the unwillingness of the defendant to communicate in any way (even simple things like a denial of being the driver) with the PPC undermined the statements he made in court.

I think that irritated the judge, who then ordered that the absence of evidence of the defendant NOT being the driver meant that PoFA should be disregarded, and that they could be chased as the driver.

I forget who the PPC was, but they lost on another aspect of the defence (I think it was signage).

Judges rarely take kindly to parties who dont show they have tried to deal with a matter before resporting to court, the reverse of this is MIL collections getting shot down because they are too hasty in issuing claims so works both ways.

Now, your got the NTK late but were you the keeper or was it someone else and they passed on your details as driver?

You should respond an say that as the NTK was timed out for keeper liability they have no claim against you. If you have been hiding crucial details from us then the advice given may not be correct or relevant.

Hi all

Thanks for the responses.

DX100uk: the letter does say Will.

Actual line is' further action will be taken and this is likely to lead to court proceedings....'.

The letter itself is different to what I have seen before.

Its essentially double sided with side 2 a 5 point breakdown of:

1, That this letter is fully compliant with Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct etc.

2, Details on POPLA cannot now be used.

3, Information regarding that their 'loss' is not punitive under guidelines set out by BPA.

4, Information about documents that could be relied on

5, Information on the Bevis judgement.

Point 1, does have a paragraph regarding Alternate dispute Resolution' and that things could be settled with court on a without prejudice' basis.

As per some above the advice above worth thinking about considering that PE usually do take action?

Ericsbrother,

just for clarification,

the car is technically not owned by me as I am paying for it on a monthly basis under a work salary sacrifice scheme.

I have the option to buy it and the end of 3 years or just continue with a new car from them and repeat the cycle.

I did not realise this at the time in terms of the length PPC's have in getting their NTK to me.

In my case the NTK would have gone to the company who have then told PE who have then gone to me.

who is the keeper. The ownership is irrelevant. I am trying to work out who got sent the paperwork and if you got it because you were named by a lease company as the keeper

ericsbrother, I will get in touch with the car people for clarity asap and get back to you. Cheers DDW

Hi all

 

Thanks for the responses.

 

DX100uk: the letter does say Will.

 

Actual line is' further action will be taken and this is likely to lead to court proceedings....'.

so it doesn't say will take court action

it says we will take further action

- more scary threat-o-grams.

how can they say anything is likely to end in court action?

that's like saying the forecast is for rain, so it will rain.......

Point taken dx! More threatogram stuff essentially, I know, just need the clarification. In bold on the front page there is also the lovely.. 'LETTER BEFORE COUNTY COURT CLAIM' missive.

Well of course

But again that's not the prescribed form

For the pre action protocol

It should be letter before action

And then only give the alternate of pay by date

Or we will issue a county court claim

Indeed dx. it is interesting that on page 2 of the threatogram that the first part reads as follows..'Please be aware that this Letter Before County Court Claim is fully compliant with the Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct'. Then goes on about the Directions etc.

ericsbrother, just been in touch with the car company and they are the registered keeper.

They explained that PE asked for my details under the DPA and they passed them on to them.

PE then got in touch with me.