APCOA 2xPCNs - Dartford Railway Station

[Cabman666]

 

I am dealing with two infringements here.

05/11/19, and 07/11/19.

They are both identical paperwork which I have attached in merged PDF format.

 

I will deal with only one here for the purposes of this forum-(The infringement of 05/11/19).

I am not sure that the land in question is owned by the rail company ?

 

In both, the PCN to me exceeded 14 days ( NOT windscreen).

You will note in their reply to challenge that they are not using POFA so they will prob claim that this does not matter.

I have attached a letter that I am considering sending them.

Thanks in advance for any help.

 

1 Date of the infringement 5th November 2019

 

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 2nd December 2019

 

3 Date received 13th December 2019. I was on holiday until then.

 

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?]  NO

 

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes - see attached documents

 

6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] Yes - I had not seen this forum at that time.

 

Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up Yes - see attached documents

 

7 Who is the parking company? APCOA

 

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Dartford Railway Station Car Park - Victoria Road, Dartford Kent ( not sure it is raileway land ? )

 

For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. BPA / IPC

 

If you have received any other correspondence, please mention it here PCN ( both sides), their Reply to my Appeal, Demand for payment x 2

- Only one attached (other is identical to the first) as PDF's in one document.

File size would not allow both.

 

 

554_Redacted_Basic_Paperwork.pdf

[honeybee13]

Wow, you have quite a few tickets to deal with.

 

From your 1. and 2. it seems as if they could be out of time. Please wait for the experts to comment.

 

HB

[Cabman666]

Not all mine, but without going into detail somebody in my family is a parking nightmare for valid reasons

 

 

[dx100uk]

Use pdf reducer in upload guide

stop scanning in such a high resolution

the land is covered by byelaws

 

who told them to appeal??

 

DX

[FTMDave]

They can say what rubbish they want, but the POFA is a law.  They don't know who the driver is, they haven't followed the POFA, so no keeper liability.

 

Then it's a prohibition.  Plus bye-laws apply.  So you won't be paying a red cent..

[Cabman666]

I appealed on their behalf a long time before knowing about this forum.

hopefully all is not lost

[Cabman666]

Thought I read that POFA was optional ?

[dx100uk]

Ok my post meant to say, like your s, is it covered by byelaws?

i dont think so..

all is not lost no

await if/when letter of claim

can you get photos of all the signs/clear wording/location please??

 

Dx

 

 

[Cabman666]

Will try DX but working all week so may be dark

[Cabman666]

If they don’t subscribe to POFA, were they entitled to get keeper details from DVLA ?

[honeybee13]

If you click on POFA in someone's post, it tells you it's an act. People can't choose not to subscribe, it's the law.

 

HB

[Cabman666]

Thanks

[Cabman666]

Confused 

My ticket has not been issued within 14 days – does that make it invalid? 

http://www.knowyourparkingrights.org/News/faq#7

 

The timeframe of 14 days only applies if the operator is relying on the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.  If the operator has not mentioned the use of the legislation within their notice, then they do not have to stick to the timelines stipulated within the Act.  This usually applies to tickets issued using ANPR (Automatic Number Plate Recognition). 

 

 

 

 

[honeybee13]

Now might be a good time to re-read this thread, cabman, we're starting to repeat advice.

 

HB

[Cabman666]

Ok will do

[lookinforinfo]

Funny that the charge has now increased to £150 and they are quoting Beavis v Parking Eye where it was decided that £85  was not unconscionable. £150 looks like a penalty and so is unenforceable.

 

Just a point of clarification. The NTK does not need to be delivered before the 14 day period. But they cannot then rely on POFA to sue the keeper. They can only take the driver to Court if they know their name. So never reveal the driver and you should be ok.

[Cabman666]

Thanks very much for clearing that up !

excellent news

[Cabman666]

In that case I shall await a LBA before any next steps

[lookinforinfo]

Another reason not to appeal is that the parking companies think that you will be worried when your appeal is rejected. So they up their threats thinking that you will be more likely to pay than some one who couldn't be bothered to appeal. The latter they think will be harder to get to pay so go for the easy ones.

[ericsbrother]

POFA regulates the ability of a company that manages car parks to issue demands from motorists and to create a keeper liability AS LONG AS CERTAIN CONDITIONS ARE MET

 

Now parking is a fairly simple matter of contract law but the POFA says the parking co has to issue the correct sort of demand or there is no liability for anyone to pay them. Thos, if they have done it correctly applies to the driver as they were the ones reading the contract and parking the car.

 

If the parking co doesn't know who the driver is then they CAN create a keeper liability by following a prescribed course and part of that is issuing a notice in the correct period. If they dont jump through these hoops then they can only chase the driver and they will have fallen foul of the GDPR and the KDOE contract they signed up to with the DVLA.

 

Now by appealing and identifying the driver the keeper conditions of the POFA are negated and it wouldnt matter of you told them you were the driver 2 days or 2 years after the event, the effect is the same.

 

So the question you need to answer about these demands is what EXACTLY did you put in the appeals?

 

Now the plus side of their NTK is it fails to create ANY liability because they didnt use the key phrases to create one.

Basic accounting errors but that wont stop them chasing you and I have yet to see a court claim defended solely on this basis and wouldnt risk it either as judges seem to understnad the keeper liability bit but havent digested the rest of the Act fully yet.

 

Appealing will have encouraged them to think you are going to pay so lets see all fo the correspondence and we will advise accordingly

[Cabman666]

Hi

I appealed online on 28/12/19.

I have attached my submission as a further PDF

 

Thanks

 

 

Appeal Reply.pdf

[honeybee13]

Our upload guide might help, Cabman.

 

HB

[dx100uk]

i've sorted the file for you

 

so didn't i'd the driver

well done

 

dx

 

 

[Cabman666]

Thanks dx

 

Meant to do it, but working all day !!

 

Yes - no id of driver !

 

 

[dx100uk]

await lba or letter of claim om either.