How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Jo C. Your Own Question
Jo C.
Jo C., Barrister
Category: Traffic Law
Satisfied Customers: 71140
Experience:  Over 5 years in practice.
Type Your Traffic Law Question Here...
Jo C. is online now

I have a query in regards ***** ***** Notice to keeper. The PPC

This answer was rated:

Hi I have a query in regards ***** ***** Notice to keeper. The PPC is an IPC member and they issued me with a Notice to Keeper for a parking infringement that occurred 66 days prior to the date of issue of the Notice to Keeper. Since receiving the notice, I asked the driver to provide me with the notice to driver. On examination I noticed that certain required information was missing in relation to requesting keeper details. When I challenged this, I was told that the ticket was not issued under POFA.As I understand the IPC Code requires its members to follow POFA where keeper liability is sought.Firstly is the Notice to Keeper enforceable ?
As the ticket was not issued under POFA are they able to obtain my details just because they are an IPC member
Is there any reason you think it may not be? Or needs to be?This is a private land fine?
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
Yes this is private land. I understand that as an IPC member they need to issue the Notice to Keeper within 56 days from the day after the issue of the Notice to Driver. The infringement occurred on the 11th Feb and they issued the Notice to Keeper on the 18th April. I did try to appeal but got the expected response of the time to appeal has expired.
I'm afraid that it makes no difference whether they have issued the notice or not. The only issue there is that you could argue the presumptions under the Protection of Freedoms Act are not engaged but they could drop down on the old case law anyway which was effectively that the registered keeper is probably the driver unless the contrary can be shown. This is not a NIP. They do not have to issue properly in order to sue and failing to do so does not defeat the action. Of course, they may not sue. It isn't particularly cost effective to do so. If they do though these points are not a challenge that is likely to succeed I'm afraid. Can I clarify anything for you? Jo
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
And if the registered keeper can prove he isn't the driver?
Then they could add the actual driver to the claim.It depends whether they can rely on the Protection of Freedoms Act.if the registered keeper wasn't the driver then it would make sense to name the driver.
Jo C. and 2 other Traffic Law Specialists are ready to help you