NPC/DCB(L) Vanishing Windscreen PCN Claimform - Taxi - Appealed - No Parking Or Waiting At Anytime - St Thomas Hospital, London, Se1 7eh.

[northmonk]

Ok got it

[northmonk]

Ok got the reply back from the PPC Solicitors to my CPR 31.14, please find attached

Regards

DCBL reply+evidence.pdf

[lookinforinfo]

Thanks for posting the CPR contents. i do wish you hadn't blanked out the dates and times since at times they can be relevant . Can you please repost including times and dates. They say that they sent a copy of  the original  PCN that they sent to the Hirer  along with your hire agreement documents.

Did you receive them and if so can you please upload the original PCN without erasing dates and times. If they did include  all the paperwork they said, then that PCN is pretty near compliant except for their error with the discount time. In the Act it isn't actually specified but to offer a discount for 14 days from the OFFENCE is a joke. the offence occurred probably a couple of months prior to you receiving your Notice to Hirer. 

Also the words in parentheses n the Act have been missed off. Section 14 [5][c] (c)warn the hirer that if, after the period of 21 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to hirer is given, the amount of unpaid parking charges referred to in the notice to keeper under paragraph 8(2)(f) or 9(2)(f) (as the case may be) has not been paid in full, the creditor will (if any applicable requirements are met) have the right to recover from the hirer so much of that amount as remains unpaid;

Though it states "if any applicable ...." as opposed to "if all applicable......" in Section 8 or 9. Maybe the Site could explain what the difference between the two terms mean if there is a difference.

Also on your claim form they keeper referring to you as the driver or the keeper.  You are the Hirer and only the Hirer is responsible for the charge EVEN IF THEY WEREN'T THE DRIVER. So they cannot pursue the driver and nowhere in the Hirer section of the Act is the hirer ever named as the keeper so NPC are pursuing the wrong person.

 

[northmonk]

Interesting. Ok so everything they sent in response to my CPR request was part of that attached PDF, there were no other documents. I'll re-upload the original PCN from their response pack and leave dates and times in this time. 

 

[northmonk]

Ok lookinforinfo, here's the original notice to hirer with dates/times left in

 

2022-11-25 NPC PCN NTH.pdf

 

Can you drop me a link to make a donation to the site please folks

 

[honeybee13]

That's very kind of you, thank you.  

If you scroll to the bottom of this page there's a yellow Donate button. 

HB

[northmonk]

Ok thank you

Is there anything else I need to do on this at this time,

they've responded to my CPR 31.14 that I've uploaded here,

logged into the bulk court website with the intention to defend all,

so what happens next?

 

Regards

[lookinforinfo]

Thank you for posting an unredacted copy of the NTH. I guess that it wasn't you who redacted the contract though both look similarly redacted. The contract has not been issued correctly since the signatories have been redacted and it doesn't appear to name them or give their positions in their respective companies. Nor have their signatures been countersigned by independent witnesses.

And No Stopping/No Waiting cannot offer a contract so no breach has occurred. You only stayed for a minute according to them?

 

I assume they with the sar you also received the copy of  original PCN sne to Arval. So could you please post that one up too.

 

 

[northmonk]

No they must've redacted the contract, that was like that when I received it.

Yes correct I was there for 90 seconds! 

Yes I uploaded the whole contents of their response to my CPR31.14, which included the original PCN 

[lookinforinfo]

I am sorry I cannot find it. I am looking for the Notice to keeper that was sent within a few days after the alleged breach to Arval , not the NTH sent to you later.

[northmonk]

I'll dig through their documentation see if I can find it, if needs be could I request a copy from the PPC since they seem to want to take it to court?

Actually looking at the original post of mine in this thread it appears that I didn't retain any of their original NTK docs etc as I thought they'd dropped the charge since I hadn't heard anything on this in over a year.

 

[lookinforinfo]

You surely would have kept all the documentation from NPE after you had the ICO involved? 

[FTMDave]

6 hours ago, northmonk said:

Yes correct I was there for 90 seconds! 

There is supposed to be a 5-minute consideration period.

[northmonk]

Right would that be grounds for a dismissal right there then, 90 seconds?!

Lookingforinfo - you're getting crossed wires buddy, we're in the hospital thread here, the ICO complaint was my other appeal the Locton estate one

 

Regards

[FTMDave]

Yes, it would.

Especially as they are supposed to put up extra signs to show that parking restrictions have changed, which of course they won't have done.

[northmonk]

Right that's exactly why so many drivers got caught, it had been that way for many years then suddenly changes with no warning

[lookinforinfo]

The fact remains that the original PCNs and NTHs contain details that, if wrong, can help your case especially when you are the hirer. You can be completely absolved from any claim by the parking scrotes. Yet you appear to throw them away despite having been told about their value from the first PCN you wrote to us about. 

We are doing our best to help you and you appear to be doing your best to thwart yourself every step of the way. 

[northmonk]

Yes I only contacted you on this hospital charge at the claim form stage, I'd discarded the NTK months ago thinking they'd dropped it. In future I'll hold onto any NTK for much longer, although a year is a fair while, until it's obvious it's been dropped

[lookinforinfo]

They have 6 years to pursue you. So throwing vital legal documents within a year seems a bit premature. 

[northmonk]

Ok fair enough I didn't know that, I'll hold onto stuff going forward

[dx100uk]

what defence did you file by the 19th april please?
dx

 

[northmonk]

Oh shoot i didn't!

I've not been through this process before and had completely forgotten the 19 days rule etc from the forum sticky,

what happens now then? 

[FTMDave]

Try to do it on MCOL - now.

You might be lucky.

[northmonk]

ok let me try

[northmonk]

Ok

I've done my defence and printed it out ready to post first thing tomorrow to the court,

see attached pdf for my generic defence copied from sticky

obviously with my reg not left in on the defence form.

This defence is relevant in my case since I was there 90 seconds so couldn't possibly have entered into a contract right?

Regards

1. Defence
1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of xxxxxx
2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant.
3. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC),
any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide
car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own
account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that
the Claimant has authority to bring this claim.
4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant.
5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer.
6. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief
claimed or any relief at all.
(