Jump to content


NCP PCN - New Gatwick Drop Off Zone - I thought I had paid for both visits?


Recommended Posts

I picked up my parents on 14th Oct and dropped them off on 18th Oct 2021 at Gatwick airport. I for all intents and purposes had thought I had paid for these sessions by way of the Gatwick Airport website, and certainly the attempt of payment for the particular 'PCN' I have received was witnessed by my parents while I used my phone to make it.

 

However no payments have ever been taken and no confirmation email was ever sent for both sessions. I called NCP on 20th Oct at 4.19pm to make them aware of my concerns. I was given very vague information about the last parking session and informed there were issues with their system.

 

I told them I didn't want to received a PCN when I have been willing to pay. I have now received one, with no doubt another on its way!

 

What is the best way to appeal this? I have acted in good faith, but sadly have no real proof of what went wrong with payment process.

 

I hope you can help. Or should I just pay the £15 reduced charge and let it go now, as there's nothing I can apparently do to prove my attempted payments? 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks barrow boy ... The wording in brackets at the end does not seem to make sense? Could you make sure it's correct?

 

I assume legally they cannot transfer liability from keeper to driver after 14days from the incident? If so, then it certainly applies here, as the incident was on the 14th Oct and the Notice to Keeper was sent on 22nd November.

Link to post
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Homer67 said:

Have you got any proof of payment?

Sadly, no Homer67. This is why I called them on 20th Oct to find out what had happened, as I wanted the receipts for my motoring accounts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

MC please take CAREFUL note of how many posts members that give you 'advice' here have and how long they have been on the site.

 

we do not recommend you do anything for now please, it could inadvertently harm your position going forwards in many areas.

 

could you please complete this sticky and upload the requested paperwork so we have all the correct info to advise you PROPERLY , then the expert forum members with years of membership and posts will come in and advise, many do not wish to get involved in arguments concerning 'newbie advise that appears to magically make these things go away', so do not post without info.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for clarifying Barrowboy.

 

I have had a quick scan look through the schedule 4 of the POFA 2012. The conditions don't seem to mention any limited time scale of 14days for the transference of driver to keeper liability. Sorry to ask, but just so I am clear on it, where can I confirm this info about the 14 day condition on the transfer of liability?

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 Date of the infringement 14/10/2021
 

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 22/11/2021
 

3 Date received 24/11/2021
 

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?] N
 

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes
 

6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] N
 

Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up N/A
 

7 Who is the parking company? NCP

 

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Gatwick Airport - Drop Off N Terminal
 

For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under.  POPLA
 

 

Sorry dx100uk full sticky now above. Please advise. It seems Barrowboy maybe correct on this occasion?

NCPNTK22-11-21.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to NCP PCN - New Gatwick Drop Off Zone - I thought I had paid for both visits?

If Dave sends me a speculative invoice I don't appeal to him. I may in passing tell him to refer to the reply given in Arkell vs Pressdram, or more likely ignore him. I do not validate him or his bogus claim by appealing to some stooge or his mate Clive.

Just because barrowboy was gainfully employed by such an organisation is in no way evidence of their legitimacy and what is more likely happening here is a case of Stockholm syndrome. It can't possibly be that my previous employer has no real basis in law to need to exist.
 

I believe the advice barrowboy has given is the beginnings of an excellent defence should NCP ever be bothered to go to court.

Barrowboy has also broadened the discussion and fully explained their reasoning for their course of action which can only be to the benefit of the original poster and future readers. However you may be understanding that the default stance of CAG is more forthright in its approach for lots of very good and lawful reasons.

Just like all the Ombudsman services the appeals process can and probably should be avoided to fully enjoy ones lawful rights.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

there is a greater need here...that is not being selfish.

 

appealing and poss wining is just that sorry. it doesn't cost these PPC's anything for it to go off to the old boys club at popla, what DOES cost them money is a court claim they lose!!

 

being selfish does not benefit more people, CAG is about mass entitlement and exposing wrong doings .

 

the more people cost these companies money, the less likely they will continue their extortion.

 

most publicity and most mugs sadly believe these speculative invoices are fines, just look at the media everyday.

education is the way.

 

the greater good is the CAG way.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

My advice is to kill the ticket of asap.

 

So in this case are you suggesting that appealing to the landowner, the airport for the sake of argument, is going to kill it off? We haven't seen that work, possibly with some of the supermarket chains.

 

How do you explain that of the people here who have appealed to the PPC have hardly ever have them allowed and their cases headed off on the court trail anyway?

 

When you were with the BPA compliance department, did it deal with appeals from the public?

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, barrowboy said:

The above posters are advocating you wait for a court claim which in reality costs parking firms very little even if they lose (they issue huge numbers). They think by winning in court you will cost a ppc lots of money. Its actually not correct given the sums involved.

 

My advice is to kill the ticket of asap.

Why would you risk a court claim which will take up a lot your time when this appeal will take less then 5 minutes

 

Courts are such a lottery and not worth it.

 

It is your choice at the end of the day.  People on forums are not however going to pay if you lose against the likes of bw legal etc

 

 

The quote highlighted in bold above is the entire premise upon which the parking industry issues speculative invoices. The business strategy is by and large, not founded on any lawful basis and should be considered an abuse of process, there are good reasons for not enabling such poor business practices or abuse. There is a principle here that goes beyond time and money and while I cannot speak for the founders of this site, that is generally the modus operandi of the people who give suggestion.

Barrowboy comes across as if they may still actually work for the parking industry and if they do and haven't disclosed this then what they are suggesting is not entirely impartial.

 

A review of the repeated and continued success of parking companies being defeated in Court by posters on this forum speaks to the fact Court is not necessarily the lottery you suggest. In fact there is a more plausible argument that the Court offers more possibilities to defend bogus speculative invoices, if it works in appeal it will work in Court, if it doesn't work in appeal it may still work in Court.

I don't think this should devolve any further in order that this thread can remain focussed on helping the original poster so will not comment further except on that basis, clearly people will have questions given your extensive industry experience and it may benefit future readers to answer those queries as openly and fully as possible.

Edited by FruitSalad1010
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Moaning Crusader, I hope you've found the discussion with barrowboy enlightening.

 

In order not to take this thread off topic, I've started a discussion thread on PPC appeals which can be found here. This thread will now revert to your parking issues.

 

HB

 

 

  • Like 1

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, barrowboy said:

Dont forget that gatwick airport is subject to byelaws so its not relevant land for the purposes of POFA.

Does this mean that your appeal approach won't work in my case? 

 

I am not actually dealing with the airport, but NCP? However, with Gatwick being the landowner will the bylaws ultimately be enforced making my appeal null and void?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, just to make sure... Surely if there is no POFA jurisdiction on airport land, then therefore its schedule 4 protections will not be relevant to my appeal? Technically airports and ports are outside the law in this case, are they not?

 

No POFA = No protection 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

HB I have. I have yet to receive any other advice to my sticky that filled out?

 

I don't think I have defence in regards to my thinking I had paid my parking sessions online, but clearly the payments did not process. Despite my honest attempt to find out what happened to my payments, NCP did not allow me to get to the bottom of it. Is there any point in pursuing this appeal?

Edited by dx100uk
unnecessary previous post quote removed
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, MC.

 

As BB is new here and his advice is as yet unproven, I think it would be a good idea to wait and see what the forum regulars think, please.

 

I'm sorry you haven't had any comments about the forum sticky, I'll make sure that's addressed.

 

HB

 

 

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MoaningCrusader said:

I have yet to receive any other advice to my sticky that filled out?

there is absolutely no rush or real need for you to do anything. the process has a long way to go , bar the threat of more fake monetary sums being added for unicorn food tax and fake DCA fees, that scare people...on it's going up.

 

also your point about byelaws is extremely relevant , no PPC can enforce byelaws , only the airport authority can and they cant pass that authority on. it is not ever wise to do anything yet where byelaws are involved. 

 

pers i'd sit on your hands, doing nothing at this stage can never harm you and as with all speculative invoices, until or unless you ever get a letter of claim, there is most def no need too.

 

there is soo much drivel on this thread im not wasting my time looking, but have you checked your online banks A/C to see if the payments were processed, not that it really matters.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Moaning Crusader you you have at least four factors in your favour with regards the the ridiculous PCN.

 

1] the PCN is non PoFA compliant

 

2] Gatwick airport is covered by statutory controls as well as Bye Laws. therefore it is not relevant land and the parking companies have no reasonable cause to issue PCNs.

 

PoFA Schedule 4 S8 [2] 

8(1)A notice which is to be relied on as a notice to keeper for the purposes of paragraph 6(1)(a) is given in accordance with this paragraph if the following requirements are met.

(2)The notice must—

(a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;

 

The reason that Gatwick airport allows unlawful PCNs to be issued is that they share in the money collected by NCP.  When motorists breach Bye laws and are pursued, any fine they get in Court goes to the Treasury not Gatwick airport authority.

 

3] by their own admittance NCP stated that there were issues with the system. Courts do not allow the parking crooks to make money when their system has flaws

 

4] NCP have breached your rights under GDPR by asking DVLA for your data when they had no reasonable cause. The cheapest way to obtain anywhere around the current figure of £500 is for them to take you to Court so that they pay the Court fees. By appealing now it is much more difficult to get paid for their breach of your GDPR.

 

Time will tell whether there are more reasons why you are not liable to pay this PCN . But above are more than sufficient reasons to prevent NCP from obtaining money from you. Just go about your life safe in the knowledge that if you totally ignore them you could have a £500 bonus at the end.

 

I don't know if Barrowboy would have allowed these signs to go up at Gatwick [they are now also used at Heathrow ] when he was involved at BPA on signage. But it would seem that these parking companies are on a very sticky wicket with these signs. It would be interesting to hear their views on the validity of the signs since that was part of his remit.

 

 

Edited by dx100uk
formatting
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You could also claim that as you only stayed at the airport parking area for a couple of minutes, this was well within the standard 10 minute grace period there is to read and understand the T&CS.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

just type no need to keep hitting quote.

  • Thanks 1

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You were very quick to come back with the counterclaim comment. There aren't that many cases where the breach of GDPR is so blatant right from the first PCN. There doesn't need to be a counterclaim if the motorist asks for damages and we are still waiting for your thoughts on the NCP signage.

I do realise that you would have been a small cog in BPA's wheel and knowing BPA they would have overruled you had you advised against the NCP Gatwick sign.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...