1
Private parking tickets / Re: Crystal Palace PCN - Not parked within a marked bay
« on: July 28, 2026, 03:13:55 pm »
Thank you both. The PCN does not, as far as I can see, make any reference whatsoever to POFA (as InterCity125 stated in the first response). I'm thinking a simple response as follows:
Dear Gemini Parking Solutions,
As you have stated, the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged contravention is liable for the charge, if any is applicable. However, I am simply the registered keeper, and the driver is not known to you. I will not be supplying you with information regarding details of the driver at the time of the alleged offence, as I am not required to do so.
If you look to rely on the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ('POFA') going forward, then please note your Notice to Keeper (NTK) must be compliant with Paragraph 9 of POFA. The NTK failed to comply with several of the stipulations under Schedule 9 of POFA, and hence the liability can not be transferred from the driver to the registered keeper. Therefore I, as registered keeper, have no liability for any charge, and furthermore will not be identifying the driver.
I do not expect to hear from you again regarding this matter, unless with confirmation that the Parking Charge Notice has been unconditionally cancelled.
Kind Regards,
Registered Keeper
In terms of specific non-compliance to paragraph 9, should it come to that...
2(a) they have specified the vehicle, land, and period [albeit I am uncertain on the 'relevant land' part]
(b) they have informed that the driver is liable
(c) & (d) described the charges due
(e) they have stated they do not know the identity of the driver, and invite the keeper to pay the charge of identify the driver
(f) they do not warn the keeper about the 28 days
(g) they have informed the keeper of a discount
(h) they have identified the creditor and how to pay
So in terms of the failing to comply on many of these stipulations, what would I point to in future (if necessary)? Thanks again!
Dear Gemini Parking Solutions,
As you have stated, the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged contravention is liable for the charge, if any is applicable. However, I am simply the registered keeper, and the driver is not known to you. I will not be supplying you with information regarding details of the driver at the time of the alleged offence, as I am not required to do so.
If you look to rely on the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ('POFA') going forward, then please note your Notice to Keeper (NTK) must be compliant with Paragraph 9 of POFA. The NTK failed to comply with several of the stipulations under Schedule 9 of POFA, and hence the liability can not be transferred from the driver to the registered keeper. Therefore I, as registered keeper, have no liability for any charge, and furthermore will not be identifying the driver.
I do not expect to hear from you again regarding this matter, unless with confirmation that the Parking Charge Notice has been unconditionally cancelled.
Kind Regards,
Registered Keeper
In terms of specific non-compliance to paragraph 9, should it come to that...
2(a) they have specified the vehicle, land, and period [albeit I am uncertain on the 'relevant land' part]
(b) they have informed that the driver is liable
(c) & (d) described the charges due
(e) they have stated they do not know the identity of the driver, and invite the keeper to pay the charge of identify the driver
(f) they do not warn the keeper about the 28 days
(g) they have informed the keeper of a discount
(h) they have identified the creditor and how to pay
So in terms of the failing to comply on many of these stipulations, what would I point to in future (if necessary)? Thanks again!
