Is this Horizon parking charge PoFA compliant or not?

[pauljoecoe]

Been doing some reading on MSE parking forum but am finding it all a bit confusing. Lots of technical law stuff!

From what I can tell - I can refuse to tell them who the driver was if they do not follow the correct wording in PoFA paragraph 9.

The crux if the matter seems to be that in the PCN they state that they do not know who the driver is?

My Parking Charge Notice seems to ask me as the keeper to tell them who the driver is (if it's not me)

So - does anyone know -is this PoFA compliant or not? Is it worth just stating that I will not tell them (worded template available of MSE) or am on onto a loser with that approach?

Thanks in advance for any insights.

[aproctor1]

My advice, go on Pepipoo, get a template and draft a response.

Then upload redacted pics of the ticket and your proposed letter/approach.

You will get really good feedback.

[Zeeky]

Para 9 requires Horizon to ask the keeper for the name and address of the driver.

The point you have read is that if the notice doesn't comply with the requirements of Schedule 4 then Horizon has no claim against the RK, only the driver, and in that case there would be no obligation on the RK to identify the driver.

Para 9 of Schedule 4, POFA 2012

(e)state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper—

(i)to pay the unpaid parking charges; or

(ii)if the keeper was not the driver of the vehicle, to notify the creditor of the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and to pass the notice on to the driver;

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedu...

Edited by Zeeky on Tuesday 16th April 10:44

[kestral]

pauljoecoe said:

Been doing some reading on MSE parking forum but am finding it all a bit confusing. Lots of technical law stuff!

From what I can tell - I can refuse to tell them who the driver was if they do not follow the correct wording in PoFA paragraph 9.

The crux if the matter seems to be that in the PCN they state that they do not know who the driver is?

My Parking Charge Notice seems to ask me as the keeper to tell them who the driver is (if it's not me)

So - does anyone know -is this PoFA compliant or not? Is it worth just stating that I will not tell them (worded template available of MSE) or am on onto a loser with that approach?

Thanks in advance for any insights.

If the vehicle was parked outside the condition set out then pay the fee. That's the best advice you will receive, come back and see this post in six months time when you are asking about County Court claims.

[vikingaero]

In a nutshell, for the PPC to pursue the RK, they have to follow some conditions.

The first and main one is that the letter to the RK was sent within 14 days of the infraction (which I think includes weekends and BH's). So if you parked on 01/03 and the notice to keeper arrive on 21/03 then clearly the notice is not compliant under PoFA. If you raise this they will claim they are not pursuing you under PoFA (which is absurd) and effectively they are hoping you will fall for their legalese and monetary request.

The main defence used against PPCs is "I am the owner of vehicle AB12ABC, but I was not the driver at the time and I will not be naming the driver. Please issue a POPLA code if you disagree." This stops them dead as you have no legal obligation to name the driver. They will likely issue a POPLA code and you complete the same appeal with them. Then in most cases, the PPC will magically withdraw the appeal (which again I find absurd, because I feel it is your appeal and not theirs to withdraw).Caveat: Some POPLA assessor have got out of the wrong side of the bed and made incorrect decisions which you cannot appeal.

When the guy who drafted the PoFA Bill was interviewed and asked about the naming the driver loophole, he responded by just giving a knowing wink.

[pauljoecoe]

kestral said:

If the vehicle was parked outside the condition set out then pay the fee. That's the best advice you will receive, come back and see this post in six months time when you are asking about County Court claims.

Ah well - fortunately I didn't follow your advice. By the way there were extenuating circumstances that I did not post on here. Personally I think it was worth fighting as there are too many of these companies too keen to make money out of unsuspecting motorists. Even the government are looking into it. Too many motorists will just roll over and pay up.
https://www.gov.uk/government/calls-for-evidence/p...

I emailed CEO of Tesco ([e-mail]) and one of his minions has agreed to tell Horizon to cancel the charge.

Tesco CEO said:

Dear Mr *******
Thanks for getting in touch.
I was sorry to learn that you had received a parking charge notice for parking outwith the alloted parking spaces in our carpark. I can only imagine how frustrating and disappointing this must have been for you to receive this.
There are 12 signs in total at the entrance and throughout the carpark advising the terms and conditions of use of the carpark. I am sorry that these were not clear to you when you have been visiting the store.
As a gesture of goodwill, and as a one off to say sorry for your poor experience. I will now contact Horizon Parking and ask them to cancel the parking charge notice you were issued with. As the maintenance work will be ongoing for several more weeks, I would advise you to ensure that your vehicle is parked within the boundaries of the parking space to prevent this from happening again.
Kind regards

Fiona Kitching

I don't agree with the 12 signs. I saw 2. There may be more signs telling you to look for other signs.
I am disappointed they haven't said that the store will stop people parking here with barriers or a temporary sign as I fear many others will pay up.(There was a partial block on a whole row of spaces due to some work going on. No signs to say don't use the spaces but it was impossible to park in the within the lines)


Thanks for comments and info. I have learned though this process. I did pay up £40 a few years ago as I thought it was a fair cop when I parked for 5 hours while attending a theatre nearby a Tesco. That was when I thought Supermarkets had unlimited free parking. I have learned a few things now.

Another learning point. I have a motorhome and when on trips we often park in supermarkets outside of lines as we don't fit. Something to think about in the future.

Edited by pauljoecoe on Tuesday 16th April 09:46

[andburg]

OP glad you got this resolved. I get it if you're in a vehicle that doesn't fit into a bay it's frustrating but Tesco dont force you to park there or choose the vehicle you drive.
Looking at satellite images of the car park in question you can even see there is a motorhome parked overhanging well into a hatched area. Unless that is you, you're not alone in this issue. It's one reason that I went with a VW Transporter rather than a larger van myself, the UK just isn't setup to cope with larger vehicles being used for leisure. The funny thins is that their own delivery vans are parked up in the customer car park exceeding the marked bays! Only this weekend i stopped by a local Tesco and there was a car and caravan parked across about 6 bays causing no issue but i expect it's keeper will receive an invoice.

[Tye Green]

kestral said:

If the vehicle was parked outside the condition set out then pay the fee. That's the best advice you will receive, come back and see this post in six months time when you are asking about County Court claims.

utter nonsense.

the OP sought advice about POFA and then acted in the correct way.

please explain how there could be a county court summons

[anonymous-user]

pauljoecoe said:

kestral said:

If the vehicle was parked outside the condition set out then pay the fee. That's the best advice you will receive, come back and see this post in six months time when you are asking about County Court claims.

Ah well - fortunately I didn't follow your advice. By the way there were extenuating circumstances that I did not post on here. Personally I think it was worth fighting as there are too many of these companies too keen to make money out of unsuspecting motorists. Even the government are looking into it. Too many motorists will just roll over and pay up.
https://www.gov.uk/government/calls-for-evidence/p...

I emailed CEO of Tesco ([e-mail]) and one of his minions has agreed to tell Horizon to cancel the charge.

Tesco CEO said:

Dear Mr *******
Thanks for getting in touch.
I was sorry to learn that you had received a parking charge notice for parking outwith the alloted parking spaces in our carpark. I can only imagine how frustrating and disappointing this must have been for you to receive this.
There are 12 signs in total at the entrance and throughout the carpark advising the terms and conditions of use of the carpark. I am sorry that these were not clear to you when you have been visiting the store.
As a gesture of goodwill, and as a one off to say sorry for your poor experience. I will now contact Horizon Parking and ask them to cancel the parking charge notice you were issued with. As the maintenance work will be ongoing for several more weeks, I would advise you to ensure that your vehicle is parked within the boundaries of the parking space to prevent this from happening again.
Kind regards

Fiona Kitching

I don't agree with the 12 signs. I saw 2. There may be more signs telling you to look for other signs.
I am disappointed they haven't said that the store will stop people parking here with barriers or a temporary sign as I fear many others will pay up.(There was a partial block on a whole row of spaces due to some work going on. No signs to say don't use the spaces but it was impossible to park in the within the lines)


Thanks for comments and info. I have learned though this process. I did pay up £40 a few years ago as I thought it was a fair cop when I parked for 5 hours while attending a theatre nearby a Tesco. That was when I thought Supermarkets had unlimited free parking. I have learned a few things now.

Another learning point. I have a motorhome and when on trips we often park in supermarkets outside of lines as we don't fit. Something to think about in the future.

Edited by pauljoecoe on Tuesday 16th April 09:46

If you had bothered to outline the extenuating circumstances you would have got a better answer.
Give half the story, you can’t come back and whinge.
kestral was in the right, not you.

[pauljoecoe]

James6112 said:

If you had bothered to outline the extenuating circumstances you would have got a better answer.
Give half the story, you can’t come back and whinge.
kestral was in the right, not you.

No whinging that I can see.

I missed out half the story as I was trying to keep it simple. I put the full story on MSE but just posed one question on here ...

'Is this Horizon parking charge PoFA compliant or not?' I wasn't interested in someone's view of whether I was in the right or not.

Kestral didn't answer my question he just did some self righteous preaching.

Edited by pauljoecoe on Tuesday 16th April 22:14

[dundarach]

Sounds like you invited agitation OP, then when you got some, got all shirty and uperty about it.

You must live in an exciting world :-)

Cheerio

[Simpo Two]

Kestral was quoting the system which is technically correct, but the OP played the human nature card and won, saving himself £40. Good move as he had nothing to lose by trying.

[pauljoecoe]

dundarach said:

Sounds like you invited agitation OP, then when you got some, got all shirty and uperty about it.

You must live in an exciting world :-)

Cheerio

Clearly more exciting than yours - bothering to post that at 7.50am in the morning.

Me - I'm excited that a top level Tesco person understood my situation and cancelled my 'charge'. Now trying to find out if I can still park my motorhome in Tesco car parks as that definitely doesn't fit in the lines!!!

[pavarotti1980]

dundarach said:

Sounds like you invited agitation OP, then when you got some, got all shirty and uperty about it.

You must live in an exciting world :-)

Cheerio

To be fair to the OP they asked a very specific question

Some nuggets posted some bullst of no relevance to the question as though it is fact (of which it definitely is not). Nuggets should be called out

[Ian Geary]

Tye Green said:

....

please explain how there could be a county court summons

I've been on here long enough to know kestral's legal advice is best taken with a large pinch of sodium chloride.

However, parking companies can and do pursue breach of contract via the county court.

The summons is simply a reference to the paperwork a registered keeper will be issued should a case be brought.

Hth

[Mandat]

vikingaero said:

In a nutshell, for the PPC to pursue the RK, they have to follow some conditions.

The first and main one is that the letter to the RK was sent within 14 days of the infraction (which I think includes weekends and BH's). So if you parked on 01/03 and the notice to keeper arrive on 21/03 then clearly the notice is not compliant under PoFA. If you raise this they will claim they are not pursuing you under PoFA (which is absurd) and effectively they are hoping you will fall for their legalese and monetary request.

The main defence used against PPCs is "I am the owner of vehicle AB12ABC, but I was not the driver at the time and I will not be naming the driver. Please issue a POPLA code if you disagree." This stops them dead as you have no legal obligation to name the driver. They will likely issue a POPLA code and you complete the same appeal with them. Then in most cases, the PPC will magically withdraw the appeal (which again I find absurd, because I feel it is your appeal and not theirs to withdraw).Caveat: Some POPLA assessor have got out of the wrong side of the bed and made incorrect decisions which you cannot appeal.

When the guy who drafted the PoFA Bill was interviewed and asked about the naming the driver loophole, he responded by just giving a knowing wink.

Can you expand on this point?

I'm doing some reading on parking charges, and I understand that if the driver cannot be identified, the parking company can pursue the registered keeper, so it's not quite a "get out of jail free" card.

[vikingaero]

Mandat said:

vikingaero said:

In a nutshell, for the PPC to pursue the RK, they have to follow some conditions.

The first and main one is that the letter to the RK was sent within 14 days of the infraction (which I think includes weekends and BH's). So if you parked on 01/03 and the notice to keeper arrive on 21/03 then clearly the notice is not compliant under PoFA. If you raise this they will claim they are not pursuing you under PoFA (which is absurd) and effectively they are hoping you will fall for their legalese and monetary request.

The main defence used against PPCs is "I am the owner of vehicle AB12ABC, but I was not the driver at the time and I will not be naming the driver. Please issue a POPLA code if you disagree." This stops them dead as you have no legal obligation to name the driver. They will likely issue a POPLA code and you complete the same appeal with them. Then in most cases, the PPC will magically withdraw the appeal (which again I find absurd, because I feel it is your appeal and not theirs to withdraw).Caveat: Some POPLA assessor have got out of the wrong side of the bed and made incorrect decisions which you cannot appeal.

When the guy who drafted the PoFA Bill was interviewed and asked about the naming the driver loophole, he responded by just giving a knowing wink.

Can you expand on this point?

I'm doing some reading on parking charges, and I understand that if the driver cannot be identified, the parking company can pursue the registered keeper, so it's not quite a "get out of jail free" card.

As with anything PPC orientated it can be a gamble. Even judges get out of the wrong side of bed the morning of your hearing, or the caseworker at POPLA makes an incorrect decision.

The MO of a Private Parking Company is to send out invoices left right and centre for free money. Many normal sensible intelligent people buckle at the first sight of a demand and pay up for an easy life and for fear of affecting their credit score (despite the case comping nowhere near a Court). The PPCs know this and love free money. Who wouldn't? (Us people with morals).

So whether you did overstay your allotted time or the camera made an error and didn't record you leaving because it was dark/windy/rain, which isn't your problem, the PPC will send out a request to the Registered Keeper for payment. The RK can either pay if it was them, or nominate the driver. The key here is that there is NO legal requirement to tell the PPC who the driver was. It could be that the PPC sent out their invoice after 14 days, or a few months later. (Please note that this is completely different to being in Court and the Judge asking you if you were the driver - the POFA law "with the knowing wink" does not require you to tell the PPC who the driver was. Again to reiterate as the RK, you don't have to name the driver even if you knew who the driver was.

When you appeal as the RK, the defence is simply:

"I am the RK of vehicle AB12ABC, but I was not the driver.
I am not required to name the driver and will not be doing so.
Please send a POPLA/IPC code if you disagree"

Then the PPC will say that they are not pursuing you under POFA which is absurd, because if they are not pursuing you iunder POFA then they have no rights to pursue you as the RK. What they are saying is that they will send you lots of threatogram letters to coerce you into paying up.

Then you appeal via POPLA and it costs the PPC £25+. The caseworker should recognise that there is no right to pursue the RK if the driver is not named. When I say should, one or two POPLA caseworkers have gone rogue and rejected the not naming the driver argument and weirdly there is no right of appeal to a POPLA decision.

What normally happens is that the PPC will withdraw the appeal at the POPLA stage, which I find strange, because it's not their appeal to withdraw. But in the event case is closed.

[Mrr T]

Mandat said:

vikingaero said:

In a nutshell, for the PPC to pursue the RK, they have to follow some conditions.

The first and main one is that the letter to the RK was sent within 14 days of the infraction (which I think includes weekends and BH's). So if you parked on 01/03 and the notice to keeper arrive on 21/03 then clearly the notice is not compliant under PoFA. If you raise this they will claim they are not pursuing you under PoFA (which is absurd) and effectively they are hoping you will fall for their legalese and monetary request.

The main defence used against PPCs is "I am the owner of vehicle AB12ABC, but I was not the driver at the time and I will not be naming the driver. Please issue a POPLA code if you disagree." This stops them dead as you have no legal obligation to name the driver. They will likely issue a POPLA code and you complete the same appeal with them. Then in most cases, the PPC will magically withdraw the appeal (which again I find absurd, because I feel it is your appeal and not theirs to withdraw).Caveat: Some POPLA assessor have got out of the wrong side of the bed and made incorrect decisions which you cannot appeal.

When the guy who drafted the PoFA Bill was interviewed and asked about the naming the driver loophole, he responded by just giving a knowing wink.

Can you expand on this point?

I'm doing some reading on parking charges, and I understand that if the driver cannot be identified, the parking company can pursue the registered keeper, so it's not quite a "get out of jail free" card.

I will skip over the reply above which is fundamentally wrong.

You are correct the parking company can pursue the registered in England and Wales. Schedule 4 PoFA 2012.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedu...

To make use of this the PC must serve the invoice within 14 days which must meet the provisions of the schedule. Many do not.

This does not alter the fact that things like signage must be sufficient to form a contract. Or allow the PC to add any fees.

Not sure about NI but I think the similar legislation has been passed in Scotland but not implemented yet.