Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Private parking tickets => Topic started by: Benny Blanco on March 31, 2025, 07:16:09 pm
-
Determining whether Liverpool Marina's outer car park falls under the Port of Liverpool's byelaws requires clarification of the Dock Estate's boundaries. The Port of Liverpool encompasses various docks and associated areas, but specific delineations are not readily available.
Liverpool Marina is situated near Brunswick Dock. Historically, Brunswick Dock has been part of the Liverpool dock system, which suggests it may fall within the Dock Estate. However, without definitive boundary information, it's unclear if the marina's outer car park is subject to the Port of Liverpool's byelaws.
I suggest you contact Liverpool Marina and clarify whether they are covered by the Port of Liverpool General Byelaws 2021. If it is, your appeal needs slightly different wording.
-
G6PRK - thank you so much!
-
Apologies the issues date was 11/03/2025
-
Date issued - which we can’t see - can’t be 5/3/25, it’s not possible to “issue” a notice on the same day as the “violation” I don’t believe.
-
The NtK is not compliant with all the requirements of PoFA which means that if the unknown driver is not identified, they cannot transfer liability for the charge from the unknown driver to the known keeper.
There is no legal obligation on the known keeper (the recipient of the Notice to Keeper (NtK)) to reveal the identity of the unknown driver and no inference or assumptions can be made.
Use the following as your appeal. No need to embellish or remove anything from it:
PCN No: [PCN Number]
Vehicle Registration Mark: [VRM]
I am the keeper of the vehicle and I dispute your ‘parking charge’. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner.
As your Notice to Keeper (NtK) does not fully comply with ALL the requirements of PoFA 2012, you are unable to hold the keeper of the vehicle liable for the charge. Partial or even substantial compliance is not sufficient. There will be no admission as to who was driving and no inference or assumptions can be drawn. Smart has relied on contract law allegations of breach against the driver only.
The registered keeper cannot be presumed or inferred to have been the driver, nor pursued under some twisted interpretation of the law of agency. Your NtK can only hold the driver liable. Smart have no hope at POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.
-
Sorry the dates are down in the letter. 05/03/2025.
-
Please “un-redact” dates also. They can be key to a defence.
-
Sorry it only uploaded the second page, this is the first page.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
I’ve hopefully uploaded this correctly?
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
You will not have received a fine but an invoice which you will need to post up but redact your name and address for further advice
-
Read this and update your thread accordingly: https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/
-
Hello, I was wondering if anyone could offer some advice around a Smart Parking fine I’ve received as the keeper of the vehicle involved.