How this is framed legally and factually (this is the spine of everything you send)
Wandsworth Council’s GIS highway records show the location in question is adopted highway. The council has confirmed this in writing and supplied a map extract. UKCPM deployed a warden onto adopted public highway, took photographs, issued a private parking charge, and then obtained DVLA keeper data to pursue a contractual allegation that cannot exist on adopted highway. This is not a technical defect. It is fundamental lack of authority and misuse of process.
Send a formal complaint to DVLA that UKCPM obtained keeper data without reasonable cause because the alleged event occurred on adopted public highway. (this is the most important one)
I am the registered keeper of vehicle registration XXXXXXX.
UK Car Park Management Ltd issued Parking Charge Notice XXXXXXXX alleging a breach of “parking conditions” at Haydon Way, London, on DATE. The images were taken by a UKCPM operative on foot. This was not an ANPR capture.
The precise location where the vehicle was photographed and allegedly parked was on Haydon Way, approximately 10 metres from the junction with St John’s Hill (A3036), adjacent to Begg Practice, St John’s Hill Surgery.
Wandsworth Council has confirmed in writing, supported by its GIS highway records and a map extract, that this specific section of Haydon Way, including the area approximately 10 metres from the junction with St John’s Hill beside Begg Practice, is adopted highway, maintainable at public expense. The council’s map clearly distinguishes this adopted section from other parts of Haydon Way further along which are not adopted.
UKCPM is not the highway authority and has no lawful power to impose or enforce private parking terms on adopted highway. No private parking contract can arise at this location.
UKCPM therefore had no reasonable cause to obtain my keeper details from the DVLA. Their request can only have been made on the false premise that the alleged event occurred on private land subject to contractual parking enforcement. That premise is demonstrably incorrect when the exact location is compared with the council’s highway records and with publicly available mapping.
This constitutes a misuse of DVLA data and a breach of the KADOE contract.
I require DVLA to investigate this matter and confirm:
1. The date, time and reason recorded for UKCPM’s request for my keeper data
2. The outcome of DVLA’s investigation into whether reasonable cause existed for that request
3. What sanctions or corrective action will be taken
4. Whether DVLA will require UKCPM to delete my data and cease all processing and disclosure to third parties
I enclose the council’s written confirmation and highway map extract clearly showing the adopted status of the precise location described above, together with the PCN.
Send the following complaint about CPM to the council:
I am making a formal complaint regarding unauthorised private parking enforcement activity on adopted public highway at a specific location on Haydon Way.
The exact location concerned is on Haydon Way approximately 10 metres from the junction with St John’s Hill (A3036), adjacent to Begg Practice, St John’s Hill Surgery.
Your officer has confirmed in writing, supported by GIS highway records and a map extract, that this precise section of Haydon Way is adopted highway, maintainable at public expense. The map clearly differentiates this adopted section from other parts of Haydon Way further along which are not adopted.
Despite this, a private parking company, UK Car Park Management Ltd, has deployed a warden on foot, taken photographs at this exact location, and issued a private parking charge based on purported “parking conditions”.
Please investigate and confirm:
1. Whether any permission exists for UKCPM signage or enforcement activity at this precise adopted highway location
2. Whether any third party has been authorised to regulate parking at this point on Haydon Way
3. What action the council will take to prevent further private ticketing activity at this adopted highway location
4. Whether the council will confirm in writing that UKCPM has no authority to issue or pursue private parking charges at this specific location
Send the following to the UKCPM Data Protection Officer:
Data Protection Officer
UK Car Park Management Ltd
PCN XXXXXXXX
Vehicle registration XXXXXXX
The alleged contravention location is on Haydon Way approximately 10 metres from the junction with St John’s Hill (A3036), adjacent to Begg Practice, St John’s Hill Surgery.
Wandsworth Council has confirmed in writing, supported by GIS highway records and a map extract, that this precise location is adopted highway, maintainable at public expense. Other sections of Haydon Way further along are not adopted, but the location of the alleged contravention falls squarely within the adopted section.
You have no lawful authority to issue or pursue a private contractual parking charge at this location and no lawful basis to obtain or process DVLA keeper data for this PCN.
You are required to immediately cease processing my personal data in connection with this PCN and to erase it, including any disclosure to third parties.
Within 14 days please confirm:
1. The lawful basis you claim for obtaining and processing my data
2. The source of my data and all recipients to whom it has been disclosed
3. Confirmation that processing has ceased and erasure or restriction has been applied
If you refuse, provide your full reasons and copies of any document you claim authorises you to enforce parking terms at this exact adopted highway location.
Send the following to YOUR MP:
Subject: UKCPM misuse of DVLA data and unlawful private ticketing on adopted public highway – request for your intervention
Dear [MP Name],
I am asking for your urgent assistance regarding a serious misuse of DVLA keeper data and an apparent abuse of private parking enforcement by UK Car Park Management Ltd (UKCPM).
UKCPM issued a private Parking Charge Notice to my vehicle at a location that is not private land. The exact location was on Haydon Way, approximately 10 metres from the junction with St John’s Hill (A3036), adjacent to Begg Practice, St John’s Hill Surgery. The ticket was issued by a UKCPM operative on foot who took photographs. This was not an ANPR capture.
I contacted Wandsworth Council to confirm the status of the road. The council has confirmed in writing, supported by its GIS highway records and an attached map extract, that this precise location is an adopted road, highway maintainable at public expense. The council’s map also shows that other parts of Haydon Way further along are not adopted, but the location where UKCPM issued the PCN is clearly within the adopted section.
Despite having no authority on adopted highway, UKCPM has obtained my keeper details from the DVLA and is pursuing a private contractual allegation. In my view this demonstrates that UKCPM has used DVLA data on the false premise that the event occurred on private land subject to private parking terms. On adopted highway, UKCPM is not the highway authority and no private parking contract can arise.
This raises two serious public interest issues:
1. Misuse of DVLA data. UKCPM appears to have had no reasonable cause to obtain keeper data for an incident on adopted public highway. This is a clear KADOE compliance concern.
2. Unauthorised private ticketing activity on the public highway. A private parking company is deploying wardens and issuing private demands to motorists on an adopted road, backed by DVLA data, which is entirely improper.
I have complained to the DVLA directly, but given the public interest element I am asking you to escalate this through your parliamentary channels to the DVLA and the Department for Transport, and to request a formal investigation into UKCPM’s data access and KADOE compliance.
I specifically ask that you request the DVLA to confirm:
• The date, time and stated reason UKCPM requested my keeper data in relation to this PCN
• Whether DVLA accepts UKCPM had reasonable cause given the location is adopted highway
• What enforcement action or sanctions will be applied for any misuse, including suspension or withdrawal of DVLA electronic access if appropriate
• Whether DVLA will require UKCPM to delete the data obtained and cease further processing or disclosure
I attach:
• Wandsworth Council email confirmation and GIS highway map extract showing the precise location is adopted highway
• The PCN and photographs (showing this was a warden-issued ticket)
I would be grateful if your office could confirm that this has been referred to the DVLA via the appropriate parliamentary route, and provide any reference or response once received.
Yours sincerely,
[Your name]
[Your address]
[Postcode]
[Vehicle registration]
[PCN number]
[email]
OK. So there is no "Entrance Sign". The first sign is a terms & contdidion sign. That evidence is an immediate brach of the the IPC CoP and the PPSCoP. No entrance sign, no contract formed.
You can email the council at with the following:
Subject: Request for highway adoption status – Haydon Way, SW11 (Highways Act 1980 s.36)
Dear Highways/Highway Records Team,
Please confirm the highway status of Haydon Way, London SW11 (location attached/linked and described below).
I require written confirmation of whether Haydon Way is:
• a highway maintainable at public expense (adopted), or
• private/unadopted, or
• partly adopted and partly private.
If it is partly adopted, please specify the precise extent of the adopted highway (with a plan extract or a description using fixed reference points).
This request is made for confirmation from the Council’s “List of Streets maintainable at public expense” (Highways Act 1980, section 36) and any highway extent/boundary records you hold.
Location details:
Haydon Way, SW11
Please see attached map screenshot / What3Words / Google Maps pin: [paste link]
Section of interest: from [start point] to [end point]
Many thanks,
[Name]
[Address]
[Email / phone]
In the meantime, simply follow this advice as any initial appeal is never accepted. 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 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. CPM 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. CPM have no hope should you be so stupid as to try and litigate, so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.
Come back once you receive the rejection and I will give you a suitable IAS appeal, even though there is little chance that that will succeed either, due to the fact that the IAS is a kangaroo court, but you never know. Keep those photos as evidence you can send with your IAS appeal to show no entrance sign.
This would not stand a chance if they are stupid enough to try and litigate and they would most likely receive a spanking in court if they tried.