Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Private parking tickets => Topic started by: padre on February 14, 2026, 11:27:52 am
-
Is it my responsibility to notify them or are they supposed to keep track?
You should tell them. They're only able to access keeper data from DVLA once.
-
Thank you all. The appeal text I've submitted to IAS is as follows;
"You completed the appeal on 19/02/2026 22:59:16.
No PoFA keeper liability - NtK issued 104 days after event with no windscreen ticket, exceeding the 14-day limit under Schedule 4 Paragraph 9(4).
I am the registered keeper. I am not liable for this charge.
My original appeal stated that the Notice to Keeper (NtK) is non-compliant with Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, yet the operator ignored this point.
There was no windscreen Notice to Driver. Therefore, under PoFA paragraph 9(4) the NtK had to be delivered within 14 days of the alleged parking event.
The dates are:
Alleged event: 18/10/2025
NtK issue date: 30/01/2026
This is 104 days after the event.
This is a clear failure to meet the statutory requirement. As a result, the operator cannot transfer liability from the driver to the keeper.
My V5C is current and held the correct address at the material time. There is no valid reason for the delay.
The operator's rejection letter compounds this failure by mis-stating the legal position, claiming that a postal PCN can be issued within “7 months”. While a parking charge may be issued at any time, PoFA keeper liability only applies if the NtK is delivered within the statutory period. That condition has not been met.
I am under no obligation to identify the driver and there is no legal presumption that the keeper was the driver.
It is evident that Universal Parking Enforcement have failed to issue a PoFA-compliant NtK capable of transferring liability to the keeper. Their case can only be against the driver, who has not been identified.
IAS must therefore direct the operator to cancel the charge."
I know IAS will reject the appeal and I'll no doubt be back here asking about next steps. I did a little digging (not too much) but it seems IAS is actually the same company as IPC, just using a different trading name for each function. So there's no chance of this succeeding.
**Another point I'm unsure of, I've recently moved house and am in the process of updating my V5C. Is it my responsibility to notify them or are they supposed to keep track? It's just that by all accounts, the next phase is when the debt collection letters start coming and I really don't want to miss a County Court summons and end up with a default judgement all because i didn't know. Any advice guys?
TIA
-
@RichardW It's the IAS in this case, not POPLA :)
Ah, fixed. Even more reason to be direct! IAS don't uphold many, but this may be one they do, given it's so far out of time.
After non compliant in either scenario I would clarify that there was no windscreen NTD and this NTK should have been issued within 28 days.
14 days.
Thanks, fixed that too.
-
After non compliant in either scenario I would clarify that there was no windscreen NTD and this NTK should have been issued within 28 days.
14 days.
The operator’s statement that a postal PCN can be issued within “7 months” is incorrect in law
This isn't quite right - they can issue a postal PCN later than the timescales provided for in PoFA, but if they do, they cannot then rely on PoFA to recover any charges from the keeper.
-
@RichardW It's the IAS in this case, not POPLA :)
-
After non compliant in either scenario I would clarify that there was no windscreen NTD and this NTK should have been issued within
28 14 days.
Also worth pointing out that your V5C is up to date with the correct address.
"I respectfully request that the appeal be allowed and the PCN cancelled"
Don't be nice, don't ask - they don't care! More direct, i.e. "It is evident that Universal Parking Enforcement have failed to issue an NTK compliant with POFA to allow transfer of liability to the keeper, and compounded this by mis stating in their rejection the position with respect to periods for issuing a NTK to allow transfer of liability. IAS POPLA must therefore direct them to cancel the charge."
-
104 days from offence to NTK issue date?
That must be a record for incompetency :)
Thank you for this Brenda, this makes me feel better that I have grounds to tell them to shove it!
Show us a draft before sending anything. The idea is to make it unarguably clear that they have not complied with PoFA (easy given the dates!) and that as such there is no keeper liability.
This is what I came up with and then asked ChatGPT to clean up. Let me know if it's ok!
"I am the registered keeper and I am not liable for this charge.
My original appeal clearly stated that the Notice to Keeper does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4, yet the operator’s rejection failed to address this point at all.
The dates are:
Alleged parking event: 18/10/2025
Notice to Keeper issued: 30/01/2026
This is 104 days after the event.
Under PoFA:
Paragraph 9(4) requires delivery of a Notice to Keeper within 14 days where no windscreen ticket was served
Paragraph 8(5) requires delivery between 29 and 56 days where a windscreen ticket was served
A Notice to Keeper issued after 104 days is non-compliant under either scenario.
Because the statutory conditions have not been met, the operator cannot transfer liability from the driver to the keeper.
I am under no legal obligation to identify the driver and will not be doing so. There is no legal presumption that the keeper was the driver.
The operator’s statement that a postal PCN can be issued within “7 months” is incorrect in law and does not override PoFA. It is therefore irrelevant to keeper liability.
As the operator has failed to establish keeper liability, this charge is unenforceable against me.
I respectfully request that the appeal be allowed and the PCN cancelled."
In addition, is it best to submit this appeal asap or on day 21 (I don't know if it makes any difference)
TIA
-
104 days from offence to NTK issue date?
That must be a record for trying it on :)
there fixed that for you ;)
-
104 days from offence to NTK issue date?
That must be a record for incompetency :)
-
Show us a draft before sending anything. The idea is to make it unarguably clear that they have not complied with PoFA (easy given the dates!) and that as such there is no keeper liability.
-
Personally, I would send a short appeal to the IAS, stating that your appeal point was ignored by UPE and therefore implicitly agreed with, that with dates of
alleged offence 18/10/25
notice issued by UPE 30/1/26
they can not invoke PoFA 2012 to transfer liability from the driver to you, the registered keeper.
All other points made by UPE in their rejection of your appeal are irrelevant, and the notice should be cancelled by the IAS.
Whether or not the IAS upholds your appeal doesn’t ultimately matter, but if not you will have to put up with debt collectors and probably court paperwork until they give up.
There’s probably a better form of wording so don’t rush, wait for other input.
If you want to pick up on their nonsense about issuing a postal notice within seven months, the truth is that under contract law they can start proceedings against the driver within six years, but only against the registered keeper if they comply with PoFA, which they haven’t. Stating something as a fact when it isn’t is another common tactic of these companies.
-
Follow up to my initial post =====> here (https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/universal-parking-enforcement-passenger-or-driver-left-the-premises-wh-9915/msg109789/#msg109789)
Summary:
Date of alleged contravention - 18-10-2025 (ANPR Camera)
Notice to keeper - 30-01-2026 (nothing before this)
Internal appeal to Universal Enforcement Parking sent - 14-02-2026
Appeal rejected - 16-02-2026
Appeal was made on the basis that the Notice to Keeper was issued too late to hold the keeper liable (advice given by @jfollows). As predicted, the appeal made no mention of the key point and just waffled.
I have attached the appeal response and all the other images again. What is the next step?
*Could someone also advise whether I've done the right thing by creating a new post or should I just keep updating the previous one?
TIA
Appeal rejection (2 pages) - https://ibb.co/F4syjb40 https://ibb.co/394RjhxM
links to photos and NTK;
https://ibb.co/wFJ0H7N3
https://ibb.co/v44xmbXg
https://ibb.co/xSwyVWc9
https://ibb.co/rKTLbQ6x
https://ibb.co/VW1x1yPh
-
You know I was going to just pay it, but I absolutely hate these blood suckers. Thanks for your help thus far, I'll be back when they send the heavies around.
-
I love you anyway, thank you for responding and advising so quickly. So I'm good to copy and paste that and send it off straightaway?
Yes.
Don’t be surprised if they reject the appeal, their rejection waffle probably not addressing the key single point, followed by a failed appeal to the sham IAS “independent” appeals process, but you never know. Come back here in due course, the end result will be £0 after months of tedious paperwork.
-
I love you anyway, thank you for responding and advising so quickly. So I'm good to copy and paste that and send it off straightaway?
-
I love this. You're my kind of guy. You found the perfect balance of professionalism and mockery.
Thanks, but I copied it from someone else!
-
I love this. You're my kind of guy. You found the perfect balance of professionalism and mockery.
-
How on earth could anyone take the photo and infer your identity from it?
The police can’t do this, and certainly some rogue firm of former clampers can’t either.
The only way they know the identity of the driver is if you tell them.
Standard appeal is
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.
Besides, other shortfalls, as an example, your NTK is issued too late to transfer liability from the driver to the keeper.
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. UPE 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. UPE 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.
-
I'm the registered keeper, my name is on the log book. The photo is not evidence that i was the driver?
MSE recommeds sending this template "I dispute your 'parking charge', as the keeper of the vehicle. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner.
There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. Since your PCN is a vague template, I require an explanation of the allegation and your evidence. You must include a close up actual photograph of the sign you contend was at the location on the material date as well as your images of the vehicle.
If the allegation concerns a PDT machine, the data supplied in response to this appeal must include the record of payments made - showing partial VRNs - and an explanation of the reason for the PCN, because your Notice does not explain it.
If the allegation involves an alleged overstay of minutes, your evidence must include the actual grace period agreed by the landowner."
Is this applicable to me?
-
Their photo does not identify you.
Their Notice to Keeper is issued too late to transfer liability from the unknown driver to the registered keeper.
Although they will automatically reject any appeal, including valid ones, it will be the first step along the path to paying £0.
Please confirm that you are the registered keeper, your car’s V5C is up to date, or if you are not the registered keeper, what are you?
-
Hi all,
I'm looking for some guidance on the following situation. I'll bullet point it otherwise I'll end up writing a novel;
I pulled into a Shell garage at 23:05 back on 18th October 2025.
I walked offsite to a takeaway next door to the garage to collect some food - I was parked for around 10 mins.
I received a Notice to Keeper dated 30th January 2026 - Uploaded.
I have checked their evidence, they have pictures of my vehicle stationary, time-stamped and even show me returning to the vehicle with my food - I'll upload these.
Since receiving it, I have gone back to the site in question to check signage - there is plenty of it, however it blends in perfectly with the car wash signage (all red and yellow) and does not stand out all.
They want £100, reduced to £60, but I think I've run out of the discount period.
I have not responded or identified myself as the driver, but they literally have a photo of me!
Anyway, please advise me. Should I just pay this off or can I beat this?
links to photos and NTK;
https://ibb.co/wFJ0H7N3
https://ibb.co/v44xmbXg
https://ibb.co/xSwyVWc9
https://ibb.co/rKTLbQ6x
https://ibb.co/VW1x1yPh
TIA