Show Posts - Brenda_R2

Whether or not POFA compliance “wins an appeal” isn’t really the point. IAS appeals almost never succeed on any grounds, so using appeal outcomes as the benchmark is misleading.POFA matters because if the Notice to Keeper doesn’t meet the statutory requirements, the operator cannot transfer liability to the keeper. That becomes crucial later if they try court action.So while POFA arguments may not persuade the IAS, they absolutely do matter when assessing the legal enforceability of the charge and the operator’s ability to pursue the keeper.It would actually be a whole lot simpler if all of these parking companies simply made sure that their speculative invoices were fully POFA-compliant   

Call 01273 404079.Or email (preferable route) safetycamera@sussex.police.uk 

Quote from: loady on 04 Mar, 2026 12:40Sounds like from what you say, it matters not if i make an appeal, they will just say no and then i have no recourse  ?Your recourse is to appeal as the registered keeper, never the driver.Follow the advice from the very wise posters here and there is a very strong chance that CPM will drop this before it ends up in front of a District Judge.

So verbal only - did you identify yourself as the driver?

Quote from: ixxy on 02 Mar, 2026 18:09Unfortunately it's far from that straightforward and trying to suggest it is wont help people get their PCNs cancelled. All it does is give people the belief they have a slam dunk reason an appeal would be granted when the reality is the opposite.Everyone who comes here seeking advice essentially has two options available to them; just pay the invoice or embark on a challenge, the first stage of which is an appeal.Any appeal has to have grounds.  I'm happy to be corrected but the strongest ground in my opinion is the fact that the document they have received is defective insofar as it cannot transfer liability from keeper to the unknown driver due to the omission of mandatory wording.If it ends up before a District Judge it's quite a compelling argument if you ask the parking company's legal representative to highlight exactly where clause xyz is on their documentation.....I suspect that's why so many of these cases get canned at the point of paying the court fee.I have tried to caveat advice elsewhere on this forum with "you should expect any appeal to fail" so if I have given any impression otherwise I apologise.....I personally think the whole appeals process (primary and secondary) to be a charade but it's one of the hoops to jump through to reach the end goal.

Don't lose hope.The POPLA rejection is entirely predictable and was to be expected.Others will be along soon to guide you on your journey - if you dig your heels in and follow the advice here then it's 99% certain you won't pay a penny.To get to the end goal in all of these cases (i.e they discontinue) then you have to jump through some hoops.......think of it as a game 

READ THIS

ParkingEye have failed to include the mandatory invitation to keeper to pay the charge required by POFA Schedule 4, para 9(2)(e).POFA isn’t optional. If any of the statutory elements are missing, the NTK is non‑compliant and keeper liability cannot be created. In this case, the NTK simply does not contain the required invitation to the keeper to pay the charge or to name the driver.That is a complete POFA failure, not a stylistic one. ParkingEye are therefore limited to pursuing the driver only, and as they do not know who that is, the keeper cannot be held liable.Whether they discontinue before court is up to them, but the legal position is straightforward: no POFA compliance = no keeper liability.Don't waste too much energy on an initial appeal, they'll reject it regardless.  Send something like:I am the registered keeper.As your notice is not PoFA compliant I will not be accepting any liability for the outstanding parking charges.The driver is not known to you and I will not be providing any driver details.You have two options:Cancel the noticeORProvide a POPLA referral codeI am sorry that I am unable to help you further.You can finish your appeal with "Many thanks" or if you're feeling mischievous "With measured disinterest".

Quote from: ixxy on 02 Mar, 2026 13:13On what grounds do you suspect the PCN has been incorrectly issued? There is no invitation to the RK to pay the invoice.Quote from: ixxy on 02 Mar, 2026 13:13Use the appeal above and it'll quickly move to step 3 in DWMB2's post above. If you're happy to play the waiting game hoping they will discontinue before court then that's fine. If you want to make it go away at first or second appeal stage you'll need something a lot stronger than telling Parking Eye they don't know how to word a PCN.But the issue is that ParkingEye don't - their invoice fails to include the mandatory invitation to keeper to pay the charge required by POFA Schedule 4, para 9(2)(e).POFA isn’t optional. If any of the statutory elements are missing, the NTK is non‑compliant and keeper liability cannot be created. In this case, the NTK simply does not contain the required invitation to the keeper to pay the charge or to name the driver.That is a complete POFA failure, not a stylistic one. ParkingEye are therefore limited to pursuing the driver only, and as they do not know who that is, the keeper cannot be held liable.Whether they discontinue before court is up to them, but the legal position is straightforward: no POFA compliance = no keeper liability.

Post up the reverse of page 1.

"The police came and seized my dashcam sd card"So did you just hand it over, belly up, or did you so under threat of PACE?

Did you admit to being the driver?

You won't receive a second PCN for a single infraction.  You get one, you appeal it and then they (usually) reject and issue a POPLA / IAS codeIs this for more than one "contravention"?

You need to post the PCN (both sides) if you want meaningful advice.

Regardless of the merits (or otherwise) of your grievance(s), each PCN will have its own unique reference number and needs to be appealed as such.Three PCNs = three appeals.