Free Traffic Legal Advice

Which PPC? Show us a redacted picture of the NtK leaving all dates visible, both sides.

You say the location is in a National Park. What is the location stated on the NtK? Some National Parks are covered by bylaws and so the car park may be under statutory control and therefore not relevant land for the purposes of PoFA which means that there is a possibility that liability cannot be transferred from the driver to the keeper who is the individual who is in receipt of the anti.

We'd really need to see the NtK and, if possible, some photos of the signage at the entrance and a general view of the car park. GSV only has photos from 2021 and the Park With Ease website does not even mention this car park. Only mentions one in Lancashire and 3 others in the Lake District.

This is a small operator and may not be litigious. As they are IPC members, appealing may not be worthwhile anyway. Have you tried Plan A yet and asked the YHA to cancel the ticket?

Thank you for your responses, they are very much appreciated. I Spoke with the YHA at this location tonight and explained the situation. I asked if there had been a change to the way they operate the car park.The guy on the end of the phone said, they now allow members of the public to park in their car park, not just YHA guests. He said even the guest have to pay to stay on the car park. I asked how long this has been in operation, and he said for around two years. I asked the location of their pay machine and he said that it was in front of their premises (not on the car park) next to the gate if you looked on GSM. I then asked if somebody did not know the area, was it possible to pay at the wrong machine and was there adequate signage to state which machine. He said there was plenty of signs. I reiterated my question about signage to the correct pay machine, seeing as there was two close together that could easily be mistaken as to which was which. He became shirty and said you will have to ask the company managing the site and then said he was not divulging any further.

I have asked "Park With Ease" for site images and information regarding the pay machine and signage to perhaps help identify the driver. I do not really want to drive around 120 miles to check it out for myself. I have now attached the NtK, and also an grab from GSM to show how close they are together (car parks) obviously it's an old image, so it shows cones blocking the entrance.

Regards 

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Should you choose to decline this appeal, please skip the IAS kangaroo court

For a spell before it toppled over - we had seen a few cases on PePiPoo where the IAS were upholding appeals raised on 'slam dunk' points like a late notice (late attempt to clean up their image with the prospect of upcoming government intervention, perhaps). With that in mind, it might actually be worth a crack with the IAS - costs nothing, and shouldn't take too much effort, and if successful, provides closure without waiting in "will they sue me?" limbo.

HonestJohn, that's of course your choice to make, but if it were me in receipt of the charge, I'd be minded to give the IAS a rare go in this case...

Whatever the back of the NtK says, Park With Ease cannot hold the keeper liable as the NtK fails PoFA 9(5).

As long as they don't know the identity of the driver, Park With Ease can never win this one. The keeper should not identify who was driving or else flush away the "golden ticket" opportunity.

So, OP, have you identified who was driving to Park With Ease? No "...I parked", only "...the driver". Not that you should be communicating with them anyway.

Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act is the law, and the law is the same regardless of which trade body they are a member of.

Thank you everybody for your assistance on this matter and especially b789.

I have droughted this appeal, would you say this is suffice, taking into consideration the comments on this thread?

Dear [Parking Company],

I am writing in response to your Parking Charge Notice (Ref: [Insert Reference]) concerning vehicle registration mark [Vehicle Registration].

Upon reviewing your correspondence, it has come to my attention that you have not sought to hold me liable as the registered keeper, pursuant to Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ("The Act"). Furthermore, you have chosen not to issue a Notice to Keeper in accordance with The Act, and it is evident that the prescribed time frame for such issuance has lapsed.

In light of these circumstances, should you opt to decline this appeal, I urge you to direct your legal representatives to pursue any further action through the appropriate channels, including the initiation of a county court claim where a judge will adjudicate on the matter.

I wish to emphasize that there exists no legal obligation on my part to disclose the identity of the driver in question. Consequently, I regret to inform you that I am unable to provide any further assistance in this regard.

I anticipate your prompt confirmation that the charge in question has been duly cancelled.

Yours faithfully,