As for the BPA fob off, send the following as a formal complaint to Premier Park so that it can be escalated back to the BPA:
Subject: Formal Complaint – Unlawful Issuance of Notice to Keeper (NtK)
Dear Premier Park Complaints Team,
I am submitting this formal complaint regarding a serious procedural irregularity in the issuance of a Notice to Keeper (NtK) by Premier Park Ltd.
I am the Hirer of the vehicle in question. I have received a copy of the NtK from the lease company, which has transferred liability to me as the hirer.
The alleged contravention occurred on 3rd March 2025, and the NtK is also dated 3rd March 2025. The NtK contains timestamped photographs taken by your enforcement attendant on 3rd March 2025.
As you are aware, an operator must first obtain the registered keeper’s details from the DVLA via a KADOE request before issuing an NtK. Given that the DVLA’s response time is not instantaneous and takes at least 24 hours, it is impossible for Premier Park Ltd to have:
1. Recorded the alleged contravention.
2. Submitted a request to the DVLA for the registered keeper’s details.
3. Received a response from the DVLA.
4. Processed and issued the NtK on the same day as the alleged contravention.
This raises serious concerns that Premier Park Ltd has:
• Issued the NtK without obtaining DVLA keeper data in advance, which is a breach of the BPA Code of Practice and the DVLA’s KADOE contract.
• Unlawfully retained and reused personal data, which is a breach of GDPR and data protection laws.
• Misrepresented the legitimacy of the NtK issuance process, which could be considered fraudulent misrepresentation under the Fraud Act 2006.
Required Response
To resolve this formal complaint, please provide the following:
1. The exact date and time that Premier Park Ltd requested the keeper’s details from the DVLA.
2. The exact date and time that Premier Park Ltd received the keeper’s details from the DVLA.
3. An explanation as to how an NtK could be issued before this process was completed.
I require a full, substantive response within 14 days. Failure to respond satisfactorily within this timeframe will not prevent escalation, as a formal complaint is already being submitted to the DVLA regarding this matter.
If your response is inadequate or fails to address the fundamental issue, this matter will also be escalated as necessary to the relevant authorities.
As this is a formal complaint under Premier Park Ltd’s complaints procedure, I expect a full response addressing the specific points raised. Please acknowledge receipt of this complaint.
Yours sincerely,
[Your Name]
[Your Contact Information]
I suggest you write to your MP and show them the formal complaint you sent to the BPA and their fob off. Request that he/she wrote to the BPA demanding that they investigate and point out their failure to maintain their responsibility as the ATA to properly regulate their members.
You should also send the following formal complaint to the DVLA:
Subject: Formal Complaint – Premier Park Ltd’s KADOE Request and Non-PoFA Compliant Notice to Keeper
Dear DVLA KADOE Compliance Team,
I am submitting a formal complaint regarding Premier Park Ltd’s use of the KADOE system and an irregularity in the issuance of a Notice to Keeper (NtK). This matter requires urgent investigation due to an impossible processing timeline, which suggests a serious procedural failure in Premier Park Ltd’s handling of DVLA data.
Issue with the KADOE Request and Impossible Timeline
• The alleged contravention took place at 14:40 on 3rd March 2025.
• Premier Park Ltd issued an NtK dated 3rd March 2025, the same day as the contravention.
• The registered keeper (the lease company) received the NtK in the post on 4th March 2025, less than 24 hours after the alleged contravention.
• I received a copy of the NtK from the lease company by email on 5th March 2025 when they transferred liability to me as the hirer.
I request that the DVLA confirm the following:
1. Did Premier Park Ltd submit a KADOE request for the registered keeper’s details on 3rd March 2025?
2. If so, at what date and time was the requested data returned to the operator?
Considering that the registered keeper received the NtK in the post on 4th March, this suggests a processing time of well under 24 hours—a near impossibility under normal DVLA KADOE request procedures. If a request was made, the DVLA must confirm the timeline, as the speed of this process appears highly irregular.
Non-PoFA Compliance of the NtK
As the DVLA will see from the attached copy of the NtK, it fails to comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) because it does not specify a period of parking.
• The NtK only states a single moment in time (14:40 on 3rd March 2025) rather than an observed period of parking.
• Simply stating a single timestamp does not meet the statutory requirement under PoFA Schedule 4, Paragraph 9(2)(a), which requires a period of parking to be specified.
• The persuasive appellate case law of Brennan v Premier Park Solutions (2023) [H6DP632H] confirms that failing to provide a period of parking renders an NtK non-compliant with PoFA. Should the DVLA require case law evidence, the judgment in Brennan v Premier Park Solutions can be found here: https://surl.li/wdnqas
Requested Action
I request that the DVLA investigates this matter and provides a full response confirming the results of their findings, specifically:
1. The date and time that Premier Park Ltd submitted a KADOE request for the registered keeper’s details.
2. The date and time that the DVLA provided the registered keeper’s details to Premier Park Ltd.
3. Clarification of how Premier Park Ltd was able to issue an NtK and have it received by the registered keeper in way less than 24 hours of the alleged contravention.
If the DVLA confirms that no request was made on 3rd March 2025, this would indicate that Premier Park Ltd has not followed the proper KADOE process.
I expect a full response confirming the results of your investigation. Please acknowledge receipt of this complaint and provide an estimated timeframe for your response.
Yours sincerely,
[Your Name]
[Your Contact Information]
[Vehicle Registration Number]
[PCN Reference Number]
Attachments: Copy of the NtK issued by Premier Park Ltd
Copy of formal complaint to the BPA
Copy of the BPA response
You should also send the following email to the BPA and attach a copy of the NtK you received. Send it to info@britishparking.co.uk and also CC in yourself.
Subject: Urgent Query – Premier Park Ltd Issued a Notice to Keeper on the Same Day as the Alleged Contravention
Dear BPA Compliance Team,
I am writing to formally raise an urgent query regarding a serious procedural anomaly in a Notice to Keeper (NtK) issued by BPA-approved operator Premier Park Ltd.
I am the Hirer of the vehicle in question. I have received a copy of the NtK from the lease company, which has transferred liability to me as the hirer, although I have not yet received a Notice to Hirer (NtH).
The alleged contravention took place on 3rd March 2025, and Premier Park Ltd issued the NtK on the same day (3rd March 2025). However, what makes this particularly alarming is that the NtK contains timestamped photos taken by Premier Park Ltd’s enforcement attendant, also dated 3rd March 2025.
As you are aware, for an operator to issue an NtK, they must first obtain the registered keeper’s details from the DVLA via a KADOE request. Given that this process takes at least 24 hours, it is procedurally impossible for Premier Park Ltd to have:
• Recorded the alleged contravention.
• Submitted a request to the DVLA for the registered keeper’s details.
• Received a response from the DVLA.
• Processed and issued the NtK on the same day as the contravention.
Since the timestamped photos on the NtK match the issue date, Premier Park Ltd could not have obtained DVLA data before issuing the NtK. This strongly suggests they have either:
• Issued the NtK without making a legitimate request to the DVLA (a breach of the BPA Code of Practice, the DVLA’s KADOE contract, and potentially GDPR).
• Used previously obtained keeper data inappropriately, which is strictly prohibited.
• Falsely represented that the NtK was validly issued, which may constitute fraudulent misrepresentation.
I wish to make it clear that I will not be engaging in a formal complaint process with Premier Park Ltd. I have zero faith in a company that is quite obviously operating in a fraudulent manner, and I fully intend to report them to the police for suspected fraudulent activity, as well as to the DVLA and ICO for data protection breaches.
However, before proceeding, I would like the BPA’s formal position on this matter. Specifically:
1. Does the BPA believe it is possible for an operator to issue an NtK on the same day as an alleged contravention, given the requirement to obtain DVLA data first?
2. Would such an issuance be compliant with BPA rules and the DVLA’s KADOE contract?
3. What action will the BPA take if an operator is found to have unlawfully processed personal data in this way?
For reference, I have attached a copy of the NtK, which clearly shows the issue date and timestamped photos taken by the Premier Park Ltd operative.
Given the serious implications of this matter, I would appreciate a prompt response.
Yours sincerely,
[Your Name]
[Your Contact Information]
Attachment: Copy of the Premier Park Ltd NtK
Please confirm when you actually send it and any response you receive from them.