Free Traffic Legal Advice

As predicted in Reply #1.

You need to appeal to POPLA, with an expanded version of the appeal already used, ie quote the appropriate legislation and lead the assessor through the logic as if they were totally dim (some of them are).

If you post here before sending you’ll get input.

This is my first time appealing to POPLA; I have drafted the below.

POPLA Appeal – Parking Charge Notice (REDACTED)
Vehicle Registration: (REDACTED)
Operator: Premier Park Ltd

The appellant is the hirer of the vehicle and appeals this Parking Charge Notice on the following grounds:

1. The operator has failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 in respect of hire vehicles and cannot transfer liability to the hirer.

This is a hire vehicle. The registered keeper is a vehicle hire company, who has named the hirer. In such circumstances, the operator must fully comply with Paragraph 14 of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 in order to transfer liability from the keeper to the hirer.

Paragraph 14(2) of Schedule 4 states that the creditor may not recover any unpaid parking charges from the hirer unless the following documents are provided:

(a) a copy of the hire agreement;
(b) a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement;
(c) a copy of the Notice to Keeper served on the vehicle hire company.

These are strict and mandatory requirements.

In this case, the Notice to Hirer received by the appellant consisted only of a single A4 letter. The operator did not provide:

• any copy of the hire agreement
• any copy of a signed statement of liability
• any copy of the Notice to Keeper

No such documents were included with the notice, nor were they provided at any later stage, including with the rejection of the appeal.

As these documents were not provided, the operator has failed to comply with the mandatory conditions set out in Paragraph 14(2) of Schedule 4.

Paragraph 14(1) makes clear that the creditor may only recover unpaid parking charges from the hirer if the conditions in Paragraph 14 are met. As those conditions have not been met, the operator has no lawful basis to transfer liability to the hirer.

2. The operator has not identified the driver and cannot rely on keeper/hirer liability.

As the operator has failed to comply with POFA, they cannot transfer liability to the hirer. In such circumstances, only the driver can be held liable.

The operator has provided no evidence as to the identity of the driver. The appellant has not been shown to be the driver and is under no obligation to identify the driver.

Accordingly, there is no lawful basis on which the operator can pursue the appellant.

3. Failure to properly consider the initial appeal.

In the rejection of the initial appeal, the operator failed to address the substantive legal issue raised, namely non-compliance with Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 in relation to hire vehicles.

Instead, the rejection simply restated that the vehicle was allegedly not parked wholly within a bay. This does not address the legal basis of the appeal.

This failure indicates that the appeal was not properly considered.


The operator has failed to comply with the strict statutory requirements required to transfer liability to the hirer. As a result, the appellant cannot be held liable for this charge.

The operator has also failed to identify the driver.

Accordingly, the appellant respectfully requests that POPLA allow this appeal and require Premier Park Ltd to cancel the Parking Charge Notice.

Yes, that’s the best single point of appeal.

They will probably reject your appeal “after careful consideration” but you’re starting down the right path even if so.

Thanks, I have submitted the appeal and received their acknowledgement Email. Will update on what happens next.

Hi everyone,

Sorry if this is the wrong section.

I have a ULEZ-compliant car and recently assigned a custom registration plate to it. This registration number was previously on a non-ULEZ-compliant vehicle.

When I use the TFL "Check Your Vehicle" tool, it still shows the old non-compliant vehicle under my new registration. However, on the gov.uk website, the correct details of my ULEZ-compliant car show up.

I have Autopay set up for my original registration, but I’m hesitant to add the new plate to Autopay, as I might incur the £12 daily ULEZ charge unnecessarily due to this issue.

Am I right in thinking that if TfL’s systems are automated, I’ll likely receive a PCN in the post? If that happens, could I appeal the PCN on the grounds that my car is actually ULEZ compliant? My plan would be to:

Provide a copy of my V5 logbook (once available).
Point out that TFL’s ANPR system has likely misidentified my car due to the custom plate.
Would TFL cancel the PCN in this case?

I’ll try giving TFL a call on Monday to discuss, but since I only updated the plates yesterday, I don’t have the updated V5 logbook yet. Any advice on how to handle this situation or what to expect would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance!

So the gym isn't actually on site. It's across the street. I haven't got any clear pictures from the signage itself but I googled the retail car park and found this sign.