NPE ANPR PCN Hire Car (TAXI) - No Permit - Locton Estate, London, E3 2LP

[northmonk]

Hi folks

I'm fighting a parking charge on private land in my capacity as a London minicab driver.

They've been sending the usual letters from them and later their attack-dog debt collectors.

I've found that a subject access request tends to back these PPC's off when you eventually send one as they realize its too much trouble and expense to continue to pursue.

I sent a SAR back on 16th Dec 23, one to the PPC and another to their debt agency and they totally ignored it and sent the usual letter chasing their money.

I contacted the online chat help with the ICO who told me by ignoring the SAR they were essentially breaking the law and to submit a complaint to them regarding the PPC. 

I sent a strong letter to the PPC (attached ), a couple of weeks passed and they sent the SAR back saying an administrative oversight was responsible for them missing the original deadline.

my question is,

do they have a legal leg to stand on now pursuing the parking charge since missing the SAR 1 month time limit?

Shall I send another  letter such as the one attached I'm thinking of sending?

Many thanks in advance

do they have a legal leg to stand on pursuing this parking charge

 

 

[honeybee13]

Hi.

Could you show us what other correspondence you've received from the PPC please? I'm not clear what stage you're at with the PCNs.

HB

[FTMDave]

The parking company have a statutory obligation to reply to the SAR.  If they don't, you can sue them.

However that has no connection whatsoever with whether their parking invoice was legitimate or not.  They are two separate matters.

[lookinforinfo]

Is this a new case or one of your old ones going back to 2022?

Either way you might be in line for a bit of compo from the rogues.

How are the other PCNs going? Are they cancelled or still being negotiated?

[northmonk]

@FTMDave Noted thanks for that

 

@lookinforinfo Yeah it's a new one, well 2/3 months old. 

[lookinforinfo]

Good news about the old ones. If you need any help with the new one you only have to ask. And of course that goes for the old ones too.

In fact it might help if you filled out the questionnaire-

PS I liked your letter to the PPC [Smart?] re their lack of providing an SAR though it was a tad politer than I would have sent.

[northmonk]

 sorry for the delay in replying to this one,

I've attached all correspondence in relation to this parking charge to this message.

Just received latest communique last week from the debt agency threatening court as the next step.

I know the drill, a strongly worded letter to the PPC is usual prior to receiving a claim form right, ignore the debt agency?

have a look,

 

Kind regards

 

2023-12-16 My SAR request + chaser + GDPR broken Claim.pdf 2023-10-16 PCN Final Reminder+3 Chasers..pdf

[FTMDave]

It's not a Letter of Claim so can just be ignored.

Thread title updated.

Did they send the original PCN with the SAR?  It would be useful to see it.

[northmonk]

I'll see if I still have it,

I've been a bit lax with these parking charges lately not come to you guys straight away with the original PCN, need to be more on the ball going forward

Ok yes it was included with their SAR pack, please find attached

Regards

 

2023-09-14 PCN - Notice To Hirer incident 2023-08-24.pdf

[dx100uk]

please

dx

[lookinforinfo]

Wow that is the best Notice  to Hirer I have seen. If they did what they say they have complied almost completely with the requirements of PoFA. I seem to remember me asking you on another of your threads if your car was hired and you said it wasn't. Have you changed your car since?

Because the rules on hirers is different from  non hirers as it were, if the PCN is compliant then even if you weren't the driver on this occasion you are still liable as the hirer so  more difficult to get a defence going. 

They stated in the NTH that they had included the original PCN as well as the hire agreement etc. Did they include all that? 

Please confirm they included everything they said and if so could you please post the original PCN that was sent to the Hire Company which may be deficient.

There may be a couple of things on the NTH that we could quibble over.

They did include a "period of parking" which is not usual but if it was ANPR times rather than the actual times that may be a  defence. Another thing is the reason for issue. Most signs tend to say" Permit Holders Only" rather than Vehicle not registered on Permit database. Lastly I noticed that the address is a PO Box which may be covered by The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013.

there is a requirement for there for documents to have a geographical address and a PO box number does not comply with that description. Ergo the PCN is in breach of the Regulations and you are not therefore bound by it. There has been no case about it yet so may not work but always worth a try. Especially as NPE may decide not to risk  going to Court over it.

Of course we still have possibly permit holders only being prohibitive and so unable to offer a contract and the contract with the land owner may have points that you can win on also.

Interestingly their accounts are a year overdue which means they will be/have been fined for that. Ironic huh- they pursuing you while in arrears themselves.

 

 

[northmonk]

1 Date of the infringement 24/08/2023

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 14/09/2023

3 Date received Approx 17/09/2023

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

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes CCTV Pics

6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] Yes, See above posts

Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up Yes, see above

7 Who is the parking company? National Parking Enforcement, NR7 7BT

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Locton Estate, London E3 2LP

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

all documentation uploaded

Ok got the original PCN issued to the hiring company - my taxi firm, please find attached

Yes my vehicle is hired from the company I worked for, making me the hiree right rather than the hirer.

I'll get in touch with the parking dept and try and get a copy of the original PCN which would've gone to them initially.

Interesting what you said about being in arrears etc.

Regards for the info

regards

 

2023-08-30 NPE PCN-NTK.pdf

[northmonk]

Got an LBC on this folks, usual strong worded letter time-  you don't need to see it right?

 

Regards

[honeybee13]

It's always good to let us have a look at what you plan to send in case we can improve on it.

HB

[northmonk]

It'll be something to the effect of: 

"I am in receipt of your letter before claim. 

I was awaiting a passenger as a licensed cab driver on the Locton estate who subsequently cancelled the pickup after me waiting a while and will fight this in the small claims court if necessary.

Plus I have friends who are experts in contractual law and make it their business to defeat these spurious PPC claims. 

So issue the claim form or go forth and multiply, up to you"

[dx100uk]

not really....

dx

 

[northmonk]

Ok, suggestions

[dx100uk]

what solicitor is the PAPLOC from?

then just search xxxx snotty letter

dx

 

[northmonk]

The paploc is from the PPC not their solicitors, see attached

 

I search the site for national parking enforcement snotty letter? 

Regards

2024-04-03 NPE PAPLOC.pdf

[FTMDave]

What an absolutely rubbish LoC asking you to pay someone else!

As you've corresponded with them before let us have a read through your thread from the start, then we'll suggest something.

[northmonk]

Ok thanks

[FTMDave]

I've looked through all our old NPE threads, and as far as we know they have never had the bottle to do court.

There are no guarantees of course, but when it comes to put or shut up they definitely tend towards shut up.

How about something like -

 

Dear Jonathan and Julie,

Re: PCN no.XXXXX

cheers for your Letter Before Claim.  I rolled around on the floor in laughter at the idea that you actually expected me to take this tripe seriously and cough up.

I'll write to you, not some uninterested third party, thanks all the same, because I am supposed to have this "debt" with you.  Not the manager of the pub you last went to, or your next-door neighbour, or the exes you had before you got together or anyone else.  That's just a basic point of contract law which you obviously don't get..

Go and look up Jopson v Homeguard Services Ltd, saddos.  Oh, while you're at it, go and look up your Subject Access Request obligations - we all know how you ballsed that up way back in January to March.

Dear, dear, dear - you couldn't resist adding your £70 Unicorn Food Tax, you greedy gets.  Judges don't like these made-up charges, do they?

You can either drop this foolishness now or get a hell of a hammering in court.  Both are fine with me.  Summer is coming up and I would love a holiday at your expense after claiming an unreasonable costs order under CPR 27.14(2)(g).

I look forward to your deafening silence.

 

That should show them you're not afraid of them and draw their attention to their having legal problems of their own with the SAR.  If they have any sense they'll crawl back under their stone and leave you in peace.  Over the next couple of days invest in a 2nd class stamp (all they are worth) and get a free Certificate of Posting from the post office.

Edited Friday at 00:58 by FTMDave
Extra info added

[northmonk]

Thanks FTMDave, I like the cut of your jib - I'll go with that and obtain proof of postage.

Encouraging that NPE have never followed through and seem to blowing hot air, let's see where they go after this

Regards

[lookinforinfo]

Northmonk

forget what I said about your Notice to Hirer being the best I have seen . Though it  still may be  it is not good enough to comply with PoFA.

Before looking at the NTH, we can look at the original Notice to Keeper. That is not compliant.

First the period of parking as sated on their PCN is not actually the period of parking but a misstatement since it is only the arrival and departure times of your vehicle. The parking period is exactly that -ie the time you were actually parked in a parking spot. 

If you have to drive around to find a place to park the act of driving means that you couldn't have been parked at the same time. Likewise when you left the parking place and drove to the exit that could not be describes as parking either.

So the first fail is  failing to specify the parking period. Section9 [2][a]

In S9[2][f] the Act states 

(ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver,

the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid;

Your PCN fails to mention the words in parentheses despite Section 9 [2]starting by saying "The notice must—..."

As the Notice to Keeper fails to comply with the Act,  it follows that the Notice to Hirer cannot be pursued as they couldn't get the NTH compliant.

Even if the the NTH was adjudged  as not  being affected by the non compliance of the NTK, the Notice to Hirer is itself not compliant with the Act.

Once again the PCN fails to get the parking period correct. That alone is enough to have the claim dismissed as the PCN fails to comply with PoFA.

Second S14 [5] states "

(5)The notice to Hirer must—

(a)inform the hirer that by virtue of this paragraph any unpaid parking charges (being parking charges specified in the notice to keeper) may be recovered from the hirer;

ON their NTH , NPE claim "The driver of the above vehicle is liable ........" when the driver is not liable at all, only the hirer is liable. The driver and the hirer may be different people, but with a NTH, only the hirer is liable so to demand the driver pay the charge  fails to comply with PoFA and so the NPE claim must fail.

I seem to remember that you have confirmed you received a copy of the original PCN sent to  the Hire company plus copies of the contract you have with the Hire company and the agreement that you are responsible for breaches of the Law etc. If not then you can add those fails too.

[northmonk]

Ok thanks for that, well spotted and all duly noted.

Yes they did eventually submit those docs to me after a second letter advising them I was contacting the ICO to make a formal complaint for failing to comply with an earlier SAR that they brushed off as an "administrative error" or something.

When I sent the letter telling them I was in contact with the information commissioner to lodge the complaint, the original PCN etc quickly followed along with their excuse!