Brassica12
-
Posts
10 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
An update from me on this one. It is now 8.5 months since the ticket received at Stanmore LU station for not parked in a marked bay. I have had no further letters from ZZPS or WH so I guess they huffed and puffed hoping I would take their threats seriously. Great credit to all who contributed and advised especially Raykay who I owe a beer too. Regs Brassica
-
Great thank you for all of your replies. I will advise on progress back to this thread as things either escalate or our friends go to sleep on this one. Regs Brassica
-
Great thank you for your help chaps. I will advise further in this thread as things either escalate or our friends go to sleep on this one. Regards
-
Cheers Raykay can I buy you a beer? So to finish the 'Formal letter of claim' I have from WH can be ignored - in your opinion?
-
Many thanks for your replies. I need help please Raykay to understand your information from the list in your link Stanmore LU car park is covered by the railway byelaws. So you said in post #7 that the Protection of Freedoms Act does not apply and neither does keeper liability. Byelaw 14(1) to 14(3) was complied with by the driver as a ticket was purchased so it appears that no penalty is due. The car park ticket was paid for but the car was "not parked correctly within the markings of the bay space". No mention of this in the byelaw. Can I continue to ignore the request for payment in confidence because the byelaws apply and do not cover the reason of "not parked correctly within the markings of the bay space". Meaning there is no claim on me or the driver?. Not sure I understand your point about keeper liability does not apply?. Regs Brassica
-
It is Stanmore, sorry I did not mention it before.
-
Hi, I've been all over the TFL/Lu web pages and cannot find any reference to certain car parks and bye laws applying. How would I find out?? Regs Brassica
-
Yes it is a windscreen PCN which I still have.
-
Hi, Thanks for replies chaps. Yes WH letter states that "we anticipate being instructed to commence County Court proceedings against you without further notice." PCN was affixed to the windscreen? What about the naming of the driver - The NTK asked me to do this if I was not the driver and this was 90 days ago. Does this length of time without me responding count against me or not??
-
Hi, Appreciate some advice on my situation. I am the keeper and owner but was not the driver for the following situation which I have ignored totally upto now. Circumstances of the charge and correspondence to date February – driver parked at London underground car park run by NCP. Paid for ticket but did not park correctly within the marked bay so Parking charge notice issued for £100 reduced to £60 if paid within 14 days. This PCN ignored. Forty days later I get the NTK letter from NCP which I don’t respond to. Thirty days later get letter from ZZPS stating the details of the parking and advising that I should now pay £160. This letter ignored. Twenty days later a further letter from ZZPS states that if the charge is not paid then they shall pass to WH and the charge will increase by £30 to £190 payable. This letter ignored. Forty days later get FORMAL LETTER OF CLAIM from WH stating that the balance is now £196 and if I do not pay within 14 days of this letter they will commence County Court proceedings. I am still within the 14 days of this letter and have made no response. So I am the keeper and owner but not the driver who I believe is the only party liable to pay the charge??. My choices as I see it are to either Continue to ignore. or Respond to WH letter stating that I was not the driver and they should seek the driver. I know who the driver is but am I obliged to disclose this?? Can I ask for a fee for disclosing this information?? Would like some advice on how each course of action might develop from here. Regards Brassica
