Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hello

We're in a situation exactly like the one described here: https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/pcn-milton-country-park-cambridge/

£100 PCN at Milton for 30 min overstay (impossible to pay for overstay on exit). As in the above thread, this was a lease car so not registered keeper (we were notified first by lease company and just today received the PCN in the post).

I attach photos of the front and back of the PCN.

I'd be really grateful to know if advice to us would be the same as the advice to the poster above.

Thanks very much in advance for any help.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

No, only the single page letter above

Thank you very much. I've just seen that the poster in the other thread has posted Parking Eye's response, so I might wait to see what people advise about that response.

That sounds reassuring, thank you very much!

On the other thread (https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/pcn-milton-country-park-cambridge) it looks like Parking Eye are rejecting the response:

"Please note, it is Parkingeye’s position that this charge was issued following a contractual breach of the terms and conditions in operation onsite, and that we had reasonable cause to request the Registered Keeper’s details from the DVLA. Please note that our lawful bases for processing data are Performance of a Contract and Legitimate Interests. Parkingeye do not rely on Consent as a legal basis for processing data when issuing and pursuing the payment of outstanding Parking Charges. We are registered with the ICO to collect and process data for the purpose of car park management, which includes dealing with appeals and any subsequent recovery action required.
 
We therefore wish to confirm that we have rejected your request that we remove data from our system and cease processing in this instance at this stage, and can confirm that your appeal has now been passed back to our dedicated Appeals Team for further consideration.
 
Please note you have the right to make a complaint to the ICO in respect of this response, should you wish to do so. You may also seek a judicial remedy.
 
For further information about your rights as a data subject, plus information about the categories of data we process, data transfers, the legal basis for our processing, and the purposes of processing, please visit: https://www.parkingeye.co.uk/privacy-policy/"

They're also rejecting the appeal and referring the poster to POPLA.

Sorry to duplicate things but these cases are nearly identical, hence reposting. Does this response change people's view of this PCN?

Thank you very much May I just check that this as an initial response to Parking Eye:

"Dear Sirs,

I have received your Parking Charge Notice (Ref: ________) for vehicle registration mark ____ ___, in which you allege that the driver has incurred a parking charge. I note from your correspondence that you are not seeking to hold me liable as the keeper of the vehicle under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ("the Act").

There is no obligation for me to name the driver and I will not be doing so.

For the avoidance of doubt, even if you had attempted to rely on Schedule 4 of the Act, you would have failed to establish liability, as the location in question—Milton Country Park—is subject to statutory control by byelaws. As such, the land is not “relevant land” within the meaning of the Act, and the provisions of Schedule 4 do not apply.

I am therefore unable to assist you further with this matter, and I look forward to your confirmation that the charge has been cancelled. If you choose to decline this appeal, you must issue a POPLA code.

Yours faithfully,
[Your Name]"

From the other thread is appropriate in my case? And/or ought I to include anything in addition from the points H C Andersen makes above?

Thanks again for your help, much appreciated!

Thank you very much for all the advice. I will respond to them with the message, and then probably need to ask for more advice when it escalates to POPLA. Really appreciate the help on this forum!

I'd respond with the following:

Dear ParkingEye,

Re: Parking Charge Notice 288486/335086
Vehicle Registration: [Insert VRM]
Date of Event: 31 March 2025

I write in response to your latest letter, which is both inaccurate and legally incoherent.

You now cite Paragraphs 9(2)(b) and 9(2)(f) of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, which apply solely to Notices to Keeper, not Notices to Hirer. This basic error alone would be embarrassing enough, were it not compounded by your persistent failure to grasp that:

• You did not invoke Schedule 4 in your NtH;
• You did not include copies of the documents required under Paragraph 13(2), such as the hire agreement and statement of liability;
• And most importantly, the site in question — Milton Country Park — is subject to statutory byelaws and is not relevant land as defined under Schedule 4. Therefore, PoFA does not apply at all.

To recap: you have issued a legally defective notice, made a baseless threat of keeper/hirer liability, misquoted legislation, and are now doubling down on your mistake with a recycled, irrelevant template letter that demonstrates either ignorance of the law or wilful misrepresentation.

You now have two options:

1. Cancel this charge immediately, recognising that pursuing it any further is futile; or
2. Issue a POPLA code, where I will refer the assessor to your PoFA failings and the statutory control status of the land, and you can enjoy wasting the POPLA fee.

I refer you, in spirit and with appropriate legal sarcasm, to the response given in Arkell v Pressdram (1971). Should you fail to cancel or issue a code, this matter will be escalated to the DVLA, the ICO, and the BPA with a formal complaint regarding misuse of data and breach of the KADOE contract.

Yours faithfully,

[Your Full Name]
Hirer of the vehicle

Hello again. We've received the below from Parking Eye:

Dear,
 
Thank you for your correspondence received in relation to the above referenced Parking Charge. We have been passed this as we note you have raised a data query.
 
Please note, it is Parkingeye’s position that this charge was issued following a contractual breach of the terms and conditions in operation onsite, and that we had reasonable cause to request the Registered Keeper’s details from the DVLA. Please note that our lawful bases for processing data are Performance of a Contract and Legitimate Interests. Parkingeye do not rely on Consent as a legal basis for processing data when issuing and pursuing the payment of outstanding Parking Charges. We are registered with the ICO to collect and process data for the purpose of car park management, which includes dealing with appeals and any subsequent recovery action required.
 
For your clarity, Parkingeye were provided with the details of the hirer on the date of the parking event by the Registered Keeper of the vehicle.
 
We can confirm that your appeal has now been passed back to our dedicated Appeals Team for further consideration.
 
Please note that the UK General Data Protection Regulation provides the following further rights:

•             The right to request from Parkingeye rectification or erasure of your personal data;

•             The right to request from Parkingeye restriction of processing of your personal data;

•             The right to object to the processing of your personal data.

Please note that some of these rights are not absolute and will only apply in certain circumstances. We will review each request we receive in respect of these rights. We do not have to agree with a request but if we refuse, we will still contact the data subject within one month to explain why. You also have the right to lodge a complaint with the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). For further information, please refer to the ICO website, www.ico.org.uk. You may also seek a judicial remedy.

For further information about your rights as a data subject, plus information about the categories of data we process, data transfers, the legal basis for our processing, and the purposes of processing, please visit: https://www.parkingeye.co.uk/privacy-policy/

 
Yours sincerely,
 
Parkingeye Privacy Team


I assume there's nothing for us to do here as they say they'll pass it back to the appeals team, but just posting for info.

Thanks again all for help on this, I am so impressed that people give up their time to help tackle these bullies.