Free Traffic Legal Advice

Any thoughts or amendments on this as the "Motorist's Comments" on the evidence for POPLA?

I am commenting on this as the Registered Keeper. The charge notice sent to me as the Registered Keeper alleges that the driver incurred a parking charge from April 17th 2026. On private land, which this is, only the driver can be held liable for the charge. As already stated, the driver is unidentified therefore this charge can not be enforced.

The charge has been issued to the Registered Keeper because the driver is unidentified. In order for the Registered Keeper to be held liable under ‘Keeper Liability’ then Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act (POFA) must be adhered to (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4).

The BPA’s statement on Keeper Liability (https://www.britishparking.co.uk/Independent-Appeals-Service), of which the Operator is a member, states that “On private land, and this includes private land owned by public bodies, it is the DRIVER who is liable for any charges arising from a trespass or for not complying with the rules for parking which, in most cases, is simply a breach of contract. And it is the driver who is trespassing or breaches the contract.”

It goes on to explain the only way in which the Operator could then proceed against the Registered Keeper instead: “The Protection of Freedoms Act (POFA) 2012 does not alter this fundamental principle of DRIVER liability. What it does do, importantly, is to allow proceedings against the registered keeper for unpaid parking charges when the creditor, usually the landowner or their agent the parking operator, DOES NOT KNOW WHO THE DRIVER WAS at the time.”

However, the operator’s evidence in the Case History section shows that they are not relying on the Protection of Freedoms Act as per this line:

04/05/2026
DVLA response received - Success (Legislation Used: NonPOFA_POPLA - Issued To: Keeper)

Therefore, as already stated, there is no pathway for the Operator to transfer the liability for the charge onto the Registered Keeper.

Even if the Operator had made use of the POFA, they failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of Schedule 4. The notice was dated May 4th which was 17 days after the alleged parking charge was due and then there were the additional 3 days before the notice was delivered which is a total of 20 days. The Notice to Keeper was not served within the statutory timeframe required under Paragraph 9(4) of Schedule 4 (14 days) therefore Keeper Liability does not apply in this case.

In the BPA’s own words: “The creditor must follow the procedures set out in PoFA Schedule 4 to achieve the benefits of 'keeper liability' as described.”

As already stated, I am the registered keeper and I am not liable for this charge. The operator has not identified the driver and liability cannot be transferred to the Registered Keeper due to non-compliance with POFA. I am appealing as the registered keeper so the appeal should be allowed and the charge cancelled.

I'm not sure where to find a source for "Therefore there is no possible route to the keeper being liable for the charge"

As I thought everything was covered by the PoFA whether they invoke it or not?

Their own case evidence shows that they are not relying on PoFA.

.....

Therefore there is no possible route to the keeper being liable for the charge.

OK, so we've had a message from POPLA that provides the operators evidence pack. This is basically a copy of all communication as well as photos of the parking. They are asking for "Motorist Comments" about the evidence - but they still have not mentioned PoFA and not being on time.

Please provide your comments on the operator evidence.

You have 7 days from the operator evidence submission date - 12/06/2026. You will not have opportunity to edit or add further detail once you have submitted your comments.

Any tips on what to put? Or shall I just repeat that as the registered keeper they have not stuck to the strict schedules under PoFA? Their case history (see below) even shows they waited 16 days for 3rd May to request details from DVLA.

Case History

17/04/2026
Date of event

System check/manual check identified breach of terms and conditions, prior to DVLA request
03/05/2026
Request queued to DVLA for keeper details

04/05/2026
DVLA response received - Success (Legislation Used: NonPOFA_POPLA - Issued To: Keeper)

04/05/2026
Parking Charge Letter Issued - Letter1 - Ltr01-217

11/05/2026
Letter Issued - Website Appeal Response CPP

11/05/2026
Website Appeal received for this case and is queued for processing.

29/05/2026
Letter Issued - Unsuccessful POPLA - Paid Parking Not Purchased (CPP)

29/05/2026
Parking Charge Letter Issued - Letter1 - Ltr01-217



I'm not sure why 29th May says "Unsuccessful POPLA" when that was when their internal appeal process was unsuccessful.

It also feels a bit naughty that they're asking for the motorist's comments even though it's the registered keeper they are dealing with. Another trick/trap to imply who was driving?

Thanks in advance

Alight amendment to highlight the delay / issue:


Dear Sirs,

I received the Parking Charge Notice (Ref: xxxxxxx) for vehicle registration mark xxxx xxxx in which CarParkingPartnership (CPP) alleges that the driver has incurred a parking charge.

However, as already stated in my appeal to CPP which they rejected without comment, the operator, CPP, failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. The notice was dated May 4th which was 17 days after the alleged parking charge was due and then there were the additional 3 days before the notice was delivered which is a total of 20 days.

As a result, keeper liability does not arise.

In particular:

The Notice to Keeper was not served within the statutory timeframe required under Paragraph 9(4) of Schedule 4; and
The Notice to Keeper fails to include the mandatory wording required under Schedule 4.
 
Where strict compliance with Schedule 4 is absent, the operator cannot transfer liability from the driver to the registered keeper.

As you can see above, the notice could not possibly have been served in compliance with Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. As the operator has not identified the driver, and I am appealing as the registered keeper, the appeal should be allowed.

Yours,


xxxxxxxx

Hi all, looking for advice on next steps.

Parking Charge Notice received on 7th May to registered keeper's address. The parking event was on 17th April and the letter dated 4th May. So it was sent 17 days after the event and arrived 20 days after.

It makes the assumption that the owner was the driver as it says if you're not the driver to give them the name and address of the driver. Therefore as far as I understand, it is a 'Notice to Keeper' and must follow the Protection of Freedoms Act - which requires the notice to be received within 14 days. However, it does not explicitly specify that it is an NTK...

The charge was appealed using their online form stating that the charge is not valid due to not adhering to the PFA (particularly Paragraph 9 about the notice time limitations etc).Annoyingly the appeal text was not copied/pasted so I cannot share the exact message. However the driver was not named.

They have replied yesterday saying the appeal was unsuccessful because there was no evidence that the parking was paid for. Completely ignoring the fact that it was sent too late.

They say it can be appealed through POPLA - is that worth doing or is that just a bunch of their mates? It also says that if an appeal is made to POPLA then they automatically refuse to offer any discount (which seems like a bribe/coercion to NOT appeal?!)

Am I correct in my belief that it should have been sent earlier in order to be a valid 'invoice'?

Thanks in advance