Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Private parking tickets => Topic started by: boxer29 on June 26, 2025, 08:07:25 pm
-
Got this email reply
Further to your communication received on 28/06/2025 regarding the above
enforcement action.
We are writing to advise that your appeal has been successfully registered on our
automated system, a member of our team will endeavour to review it within the next 15
working days however please note we may take up to 28 days to respond. Your appeal,
the photographs and patrol officers notes (where applicable) will be taken into
consideration.
Please note, all payment dates are put on hold while an appeal is considered.
A response will be forwarded as soon as possible. If you don't receive your decision
within 28 days please contact us.
If necessary the discount period will then be extended for a further 14 days after the
decision letter is sent.
Yours faithfully,
Customer Services
Minster Baywatch LTD
-
Thanks B789 for you help. much appreciated.
online appeal submitted
-
Any initial appeal will be rejected so simply appeal, ONLY as the 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.
The NtK is not fully 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.
Use the following as your appeal. No need to embellish or remove anything from it:
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. Minster Baywatch 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. Minster Baywatch have no hope at POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.
-
HI,
Can you download the NTK now.
the 28 days will be over from the 3rd June on 30th June, is this right counting..
-
i am attaching the NTK here .
Thanks for your help
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Your link to the Notice to Keeper (NtK) is not working. We need to see both sides of the NtK.
Here is the evidence that the driver missed when entering the car park, that the terms and conditions have changed:
(https://i.imgur.com/hbZv7cR.jpeg) (https://maps.app.goo.gl/ntkNYo3TZTAjCn156)
Once we have seen the NtK, we can advise further.
READ THIS FIRST - Private Parking Charges Forum guide (https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/)
-
The back of the notice
https://maps.app.goo.gl/7LfHhWJRZ3F5tiqR9
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
on 27.5.2025 the registered keeper car was parked at The Bradford Mall car park, BD3 8EZ with blue badge displayed correctly. The parking was to have food around the corner. The owner did say that you can park in the rear car park in the past.
Now i have got a ticket while parked in the car park dated 3.6.25 . The restaurant says that they started this couple of months ago, which i was not aware of. i did not check the signs either.
i will try to attach pictures as well of the Notice to keeper.
Can i please seek your advice in dealing with this notice.
Thanks
https://ivory-lanita-27.tiiny.site
[attachment deleted by admin]