Free Traffic Legal Advice

Don’t identify the driver, and the statement about the right to recover from the registered keeper is untrue because this is not ‘relevant land’ for the purposes of the legislation.

There are many appeals here on this basis.

MET will dismiss the appeal, but provide a POPLA code which can be used with a more detailed appeal to find in your favour.

Easy one to deal with… as long as the unknown drivers identity is not revealed. There is no legal obligation on the known keeper (the recipient of the Notice to Keeper (NtK)) to reveal the identity of the unknown driver and no inference or assumptions can be made.

The location is not relevant land for the purposes 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 registered keeper. MET cannot hold a registered keeper liable for any alleged contravention on land that is under statutory control. As a matter of fact and law, MET will be well aware that they cannot use the PoFA provisions because Stansted Airport is not 'relevant land'.

If Stansted Airport wanted to hold owners or keepers liable under Airport Bylaws, that would be within the landowner's gift and another matter entirely. However, not only is that not pleaded, it is also not legally possible because MET is not the Airport owner and your 'parking charge' is not and never attempts to be a penalty. It is created for MET's own profit (as opposed to a bylaws penalty that goes to the public purse) and MET 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. MET have no hope at POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.

Come back when they reject that for your POPLA appeal.

sorry, one more question.  I am doing this on behalf of the registered keeper.  Is it ok to send it from my email address or does it have to be from the keeper's?

I presume you are not saying that I would have to say that I am the keeper (as that is false)  Would I reply that i am challenging in the name of the keeper?

I have received the below response regarding this ticket, can you please advise how I should respond?  Apart from anything else, I understand there should be 60 minutes free parking at this car park?

Site: (346) Southgate Park
Issue date: 24/07/2025
Thank you for your correspondence in respect of the above charge. The charge was not incurred at the Airport, it was
incurred at Southgate Park (Starbucks) as the store was closed at the time and no payment was made for your stay.
If you would like to add additional comments to your appeal this can be uploaded at www.appealmetparking.com. We
have placed your charge on hold for a further 14 days to allow you time to do so. If we do not receive a response by the
end of the 14 days, we will have to reach a decision on your appeal based on the information we hold at that time.
We are confident that our notice to keeper complies in all respects with the requirements of the Protection of Freedoms
Act and you are advised that where the charge has not been paid in full and 29 days has passed since we issued the
charge and we still do not know the name and address for service of court papers of the driver, we are entitled to pursue
the registered keeper for payment of the outstanding charge.
Yours sincerely

No, that is the full message (other than the ABN detail and the registration/ keeper details)

They are saying that it wasn't incurred at the airport but at Starbucks, is that still not relevant land?
thanks