UKPC £100 ' fine' for not displaying free ticket **Withdrawn**

[Guest]

Hi

 

My girlfriend parked in a UKPC car park with free parking but didn't notice you needed a ticket. UKPC have issued a Notice To Keeper for £100.

 

I always used to ignore these but I gather the advice is not to. She has until 22nd October to pay or appeal.

 

Please advise - I've been told multiple things about the uselessness (or not) of the appeals process. Can anyone help, especially given it was free parking for (I think) up to three hours, which makes a £100 'fine' particularly ludicrous.

 

Many thanks

[ericsbrother]

How long after the event did she receive this NTK? I presume that it was because of an automatic number plate reading device that she got an NTK rather than a ticket on the car.

If that is the case the NTK must arrive before 14 days after the event or it is not valid.

When we know the answer to this we can help with an appeal to the parking co and then an appeal to POPLA, which she will win.

I'm sure that your GF did get a ticket from the machine but input the wrong data, giving rise to this erroneous demand being issued so she may well ask UKPC to prove that she didnt as her first appeal to them. (hint hint)

[Guest]

Ah, sorry - she did get a windscreen ticket but I advised her to wait for NTK.

 

As to the parking ticket, they noted she didn't have one at all, and I'm not sure any data required inputting - just pressing a button.

 

I've drafted a letter as per advice on moneysavingexpert forums to appeal to parking co (which I'm sure they will reject), then POPLA.

 

Cheers

[ericsbrother]

Ok, when was the date of the alleged breach and what was the date when she received the NTK? again, both dates important. If no NTK yet then wait until it does as it is easier to defeat these claims as the keeper than the driver.

[Guest]

The alleged breach was 23rd August and the NTK was received a week ago, dated 25/09/2014.

[dx100uk]

it is NOT A FINE

 

 

nowhere do they use or are they allowed to use that word.

 

 

it is a speculative invoice.

 

 

dx

[ericsbrother]

So, within time.

 

 

Any evidence of the breach-ie photo of the car without ticket displayed?

 

You can appeal to the parking co for any reason

 

 

what you say isnt that important

 

 

I would just state that the ticket was placed inside the vehicle where it could be seen

and it is not a breach of the conditions if their servants are unable to see it because they have failed to show due dilligence.

 

Then, when they respond you go to POPLA with the no loss caused to parking co

 

 

and claim is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss but a penalty as per Dunlop v New Garage and motor Co(1915)

[Guest]

Hi ericsbrother

 

Many thanks for that, I will go ahead as advised.

 

dxbrotheruk:

 

I know it's not a fine, that's why I put it in quotes. i.e. they'd clearly like to think of it as that.

[Guest]

And no, there is no evidence of breach.

 

Cheers

[dx100uk]

I put the quotes there!

 

 

dx

[themagician]

Hi ericsbrother

 

Many thanks for that, I will go ahead as advised.

 

dxbrotheruk:

 

I know it's not a fine, that's why I put it in quotes. i.e. they'd clearly like to think of it as that.

if you know its not a fine you shouldn't refer to it as such' as any new members reading this would assume that's exactly what it is!

IT's NOT a fine.

[Guest]

Surprisingly (and slightly disappointingly), UKPC wrote back, dropping the charge and stating that they were sorry about the experience my gf had of them, and that they never mean to harass etc (I wrote a bit at the end of the letter saying we would complain to their client and let them know what a bunch of gits they were, etc).

 

So, all's well that ends well.

[Guest]

if you know its not a fine you shouldn't refer to it as such' as any new members reading this would assume that's exactly what it is!

IT's NOT a fine.

 

Yeah, OK, fine (see what I did there). You should take it easy.

[ericsbrother]

glad that they saw fit to use a bit of sense rather than making you go further (and costing them even more money).