The Notice to Keeper (NtK) is not PoFA compliant. PoFA Schedule 4 paragraph 9(2)(a) requires the notice to “specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates”.
This NCP notice only gives: “Date of incident: 14/10/2025”. There is no period (e.g. “between 10:32 and 10:45”), and the reference to an “incident date” does not meet the statutory wording.
Additionally, under paragraph 9(2)(f), the notice must: “warn the keeper that if... after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given... the amount remains unpaid, the creditor will have the right to recover the unpaid charge from the keeper”.
The notice does not clearly contain this mandatory warning. Instead, it only gives a generic statement about debt recovery after 28 days. This is not the same as the statutory warning of keeper liability and therefore invalidates any PoFA transfer of liability.
You can also argue that PoFA requires that the notice specifies “the relevant land on which the vehicle was parked”. The text mentions “Birmingham High Street”, which is vague and does not identify the precise private land or car park name (e.g. “Birmingham High Street NCP Car Park”). Lack of specificity could be argued as non-compliant under paragraph 9(2)(a).
With the above in mind, you only appeal as the Keeper. They have no idea who the driver is unless you blab it to them, inadvertently or otherwise. There is no legal obligation on the Keeper to identify the driver. You only ever refer to the driver in the third person. No "I did this or that", only "the driver did this or that". Don't tell 'em your name Pike!
The NtK is not compliant with all the requirements of PoFA which means that if the
unknown driver is not identified, they cannot transfer liability for the charge from the
unknown driver to the
known keeper.
Use the following as your appeal. No need to embellish or remove anything from it:
I am the keeper of the vehicle and I dispute your 'parking charge'. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner.
As your Notice to Keeper (NtK) does not fully comply with ALL the requirements of PoFA 2012, you are unable to hold the keeper of the vehicle liable for the charge. Partial or even substantial compliance is not sufficient. There will be no admission as to who was driving and no inference or assumptions can be drawn. NCP has relied on contract law allegations of breach against the driver only.
The registered keeper cannot be presumed or inferred to have been the driver, nor pursued under some twisted interpretation of the law of agency. Your NtK can only hold the driver liable. NCP have no hope at POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.
