Free Traffic Legal Advice

I am the registered keeper of the vehicle. I deny any liability for this parking charge and appeal in full.

My tenancy contains no requirement to display a permit or submit to any third-party enforcement scheme. Accordingly, no Parking Charge Notices should ever have been issued to me for using the resident-only gated parking provided with my tenancy.

Imposing a third-party permit scheme over resident parking amounts to derogation from grant and interferes with quiet enjoyment in a residential context (see Jopson v Homeguard). The operator must show the tenancy incorporates any ‘estate regulations’ or permit terms; it does not.

The location is a gated access by resident fob/remote, which confirms this is tenant amenity, not a public car park.

The parking operator bears the burden of proof. It must establish that a contravention occurred, that a valid contract was formed between the operator and the driver, and that it has lawful authority to operate and issue Parking Charge Notices (PCNs) in its own name. I therefore require the operator to provide the following:

1. Strict proof of clear, prominent, and adequate signage that was in place on the date in question, at the exact location of the alleged contravention. This must include a detailed site plan showing the placement of each sign and legible images of the signs in situ. The operator must demonstrate that signage was visible, legible, and compliant with the IPC Code of Practice that was valid at the time of the alleged contravention, including requirements relating to font size, positioning, and the communication of key terms.

2. Strict proof of a valid, contemporaneous contract or lease flowing from the landowner that authorises the operator to manage parking, issue PCNs, and pursue legal action in its own name. I refer the operator and the IAS assessor to Section 14 of the PPSCoP (Relationship with Landowner), which clearly sets out mandatory minimum requirements that must be evidenced before any parking charge may be issued on controlled land.

In particular, Section 14.1(a)–(j) requires the operator to have in place written confirmation from the landowner which includes:

• the identity of the landowner,
• a boundary map of the land to be managed,
• applicable byelaws,
• the duration and scope of authority granted,
• detailed parking terms and conditions including any specific permissions or exemptions,
• the means of issuing PCNs,
• responsibility for obtaining planning and advertising consents,
• and the operator’s obligations and appeal procedure under the Code.

These requirements are not optional. They are a condition precedent to issuing a PCN and bringing any associated action. Accordingly, I put the operator to strict proof of compliance with the entirety of Section 14 of the PPSCoP. Any document that contains redactions must not obscure the above conditions. The document must also be dated and signed by identifiable persons, with evidence of their authority to act on behalf of the parties to the agreement. The operator must provide an agreement showing clear authorisation from the landowner for this specific site.

For the avoidance of doubt, the operator must also show that any ‘estate regulations’ or permit terms are expressly incorporated into my tenancy. They are not.

3. Strict proof that the enforcement mechanism (e.g. ANPR or manual patrol) is reliable, synchronised, maintained, and calibrated regularly. The operator must prove the vehicle was present for the full duration alleged and not simply momentarily on site, potentially within a permitted consideration or grace period as defined by the PPSCoP.

4. Strict proof that the Notice to Keeper complies with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA), if the operator is attempting to rely on keeper liability. Any failure to comply with the mandatory wording or timelines in Schedule 4 of PoFA renders keeper liability unenforceable.

5. Strict proof that the NtK was posted in time for it to have been given within the relevant period. The PPSCoP section 8.1.2(d) Note 2 requires that the operator must retain a record of the date of posting of a notice, not simply of that notice having been generated (e.g. the date that any third-party Mail Consolidator actually put it in the postal system.)

6. I note IAS decisions are anonymised and unpublished. Regardless, the outcome here turns on evidence: no incorporation into the tenancy, strict proof of landowner authority, clear signage, and (if alleged) strict PoFA compliance.

If the assessor chooses to overlook these legal requirements and accept vague assertions or redacted documents from the operator, that will speak for itself—and lend further weight to the growing concern that this appeals service is neither independent nor genuinely legally qualified.

In short, I dispute this charge in its entirety and require full evidence of compliance with the law, industry codes of practice, and basic contractual principles.

will they know that I have moved and send to the correct address?

Re: Parking Charge Notice [reference number] — Denial of Liability and Notification of Temporary Overseas Address

For the Attention of the Data Protection Officer
Napier Parking Limited
To: dpo@napierparking.co.uk
cc: services@napierparking.co.uk

Dear Sirs,

I write as the registered keeper of the above-referenced vehicle. I deny any liability for the alleged parking charge and reject any suggestion that a valid contract was formed or that any debt exists.

If you intend to pursue litigation, you are hereby placed on formal notice that I will be residing outside the jurisdiction of England and Wales between [Date 1] and [Date 2] (inclusive). In accordance with CPR 6.8(1), I hereby nominate the following address for service for that period:

[Full overseas address]

Should you wish to issue proceedings, you may do so by serving the claim form to the above address between those dates. Alternatively, you may wait until after [Date 2] and serve any such documents at my usual English address, which will resume validity for service upon my return.

You are expressly warned that any attempt to serve proceedings to my English address between [Date 1] and [Date 2], despite this notice, will be treated as defective service within the meaning of CPR 6.9(3), as you will have been informed that the address is not my current or last known residence. Any default judgment so obtained would be immediately challenged and set aside under CPR 13.2 and/or 13.3, with a concurrent application for costs and sanctions under CPR 27.14(2)(g), CPR 3.4(2)(b) and CPR 44.11 for unreasonable conduct and abuse of process.

Furthermore, any attempt to pass the alleged debt to a third-party debt recovery agent for contact or correspondence at my English address between [Date 1] and [Date 2] will be treated as unnecessary, vexatious, and contrary to the UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR), given that you will have been explicitly informed that I am not resident there. Any such processing or disclosure of my personal data during that period would amount to a breach of Article 5(1)(a) and (b) of the UK GDPR, and I will not hesitate to pursue a formal complaint to the Information Commissioner’s Office and/or seek damages for unlawful processing under Article 82.

This correspondence puts you squarely on notice of the above. You are expected to update all internal and third-party records to reflect the temporary service address and to ensure full compliance with the Civil Procedure Rules and data protection law.

For the avoidance of doubt, this letter does not constitute an admission of liability, nor does it create or acknowledge any contractual obligation to Napier Parking Limited or its agents. All rights are reserved.

Please confirm in writing that your records have been updated and that you will neither serve nor instruct any third party to contact my English address between [Date 1] and [Date 2].

Yours faithfully,

[Full Name of Keeper]
[Usual English Address]