Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hi

The driver of my registered vehicle failed to pay for a 23 minute stay in the car park. The license plate was snapped and a fine sent to the registered owner.

From the research I've done, I'm seeking advice about whether the fine can be dismissed under non-compliance for POFA 2012 Schedule 4, as I have received the letter beyond the allowed 14 day period (key dates below):

Parking charge date - 29/11/2025
NTK letter date - 13/12/2025
NTK arrived today - 17/12/2025

There's no stamp on the envelope other than the printed "Delivered by Royal Mail C9 10002", but either way between the charge date and the letter date (excluding postage time) it's 15 days inclusive.

NTK uploaded here - https://ibb.co/B2ZLdTTD

What's your thoughts on this?
If dismissible, what are my next steps?

Thank you in advance!

Just for your record "it is not a fine".

It is an invoice.

The word "Fine" makes us cringe.

Just for your record "it is not a fine".

It is an invoice.

The word "Fine" makes us cringe.

Heard loud and clear, appreciate your comment

“Deemed delivered” 16/12 which is more than 14 days after 29/11, two working days allowed for posting.
There is no register of owners, you are the registered keeper.

You appeal, as the registered keeper, that you can not be liable for the actions of the driver, whom you will not be identifying. Sample appeals here, you may want to post what you plan to use here before sending.

The appeal will be rejected even though it’s correct, but it’s the start of the process in which you will end up paying nothing.

"Registered keeper" - got it

I've got this so far, please feel free to tell me what you think (below).
The process is an online form on their website.

From what it sounds like the process will be:
* I'll appeal the NTK on their website.
* They'll either reject it or I won't hear anything back at all.
* Presumably at some point I'll get a POPLA code from them (maybe I'll have to ask them again for it if not automatically provided?)
* I'll submit a similar appeal to POPLA.
* Hopefully NTK goes away at that point.




Dear Bank Park Management,

I am the registered keeper of the vehicle [Reg Number].

The alleged parking event occurred on 29 November 2025. Your Notice to Keeper is dated 13 December 2025, but I received it on 17 December 2025, which is outside the 14-day period required by paragraph 9(4) of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.

As the Notice was not delivered within the statutory timescale, you have failed to establish keeper liability. I will not be identifying the driver.

Please confirm that the charge has been cancelled or provide a POPLA code so that I may submit an appeal.

Thank you,
[My Name]
Registered Keeper

I would add reference to the “deemed delivery” date of 16/12 as well, otherwise they could say they’re not responsible for postal delays and the actual delivery date. In this, the “deemed” delivery date is usually more important than the actual delivery date, and since both are later than the requirements of PoFA 2012 anyway, mention them both.

Good idea.

-- REVISED APPEAL --

Dear Bank Park Management,

I am the registered keeper of the vehicle [registration number].

The alleged parking event occurred on 29 November 2025. Your Notice to Keeper is dated 13 December 2025. It was received on 17 December 2025 and, in any event, under section 7 of the Interpretation Act 1978, the earliest deemed date of delivery would be 16 December 2025, which is outside the 14-day period required by paragraph 9(4) of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.

As the Notice to Keeper was not delivered within the statutory timescale, you have failed to establish keeper liability. I will not be identifying the driver.

Please confirm that the charge has been cancelled or provide a POPLA verification code.

Thank you,
[My Name]
Registered Keeper

Don’t waffle on about what date you actually received it. It is irrelevant. The ONLY thing that matters is that the NtK was “given” more than 14 days after the date of the alleged contravention. Therefore, they cannot rely on PoFA to hold the Keeper liable if the driver is not identified.

Also, I have no idea why you are going on about POPLA. Bank Park are IPC members so it will be the IAS that deliberates the secondary appeal. Good luck with that kangaroo court.

Ahh thanks for the heads up, I didn't realise there was more than one ie POPLA & IAS. Sounds like IAS are a right pain in the ass, and it'll likely require going through bank park appeal > ias appeal > debt collector attempts > then finally court before it gets resolved for a PoFA violation.

The IAS are useless, but of the very few cases they do accept, it is often ones where there is a clear and unarguable failure to comply with PoFA, so if Bank reject it's still well worth a go at IAS.

Yes, they’re common.

They are trying to trick you into identifying the driver. You can ignore.

They will reject your appeal in a week or so, “after careful consideration” which is untrue, they always reject appeals because it’s only about the money.

Then you can appeal to the IAS who might uphold your appeal, but even if they don’t, we can advise and you will end up paying £0.