First draft reply
I am appealing as the registered keeper of the vehicle. There is no obligation for me to name the driver and I will not be doing so.
Although the letter is titled "Parking Charge to Keeper" and there is no explicit reference to the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ("The Act"), I note that
- My details as keeper were obtained only pursuant to your undertaking to DVLA that these would be used for permitted and statutory purposes, namely to issue a Notice to Keeper ("NtK"), and you therefore intended that I treat the letter as a NtK.
- Your correspondence threatens to hold me liable as the registered keeper which can only be done by serving a NtK that complies with Schedule 4 of The Act.
1. Your Notice to Keeper was served out of time and no liability attaches to me as registered keeperYour NtK was sent on 15 May 2025 and therefore deemed to have been given to the keeper on Monday 19 May, which is the second working day following 15 May.
As the relevant time period for issuing the NtK under The Act expired on 17 May 2025, your NtK was served out of time and you are unable to hold the keeper of the vehicle liable for the charge. There will be no admission as to who was driving and no inference or assumptions can be drawn.
2. Inappropriate processing of personal dataAlthough it was evident on the date the NtK was printed that you were out of time to invoke The Act against me as keeper if you could not identify the driver, you chose to send a NtK with the wording
"[..]
we will have the right to recover from you, so much of the Parking Charge as remains unpaid.Additional charges may be recovered from the liable party if debt recovery action or court proceedings become necessary. This notice is deemed to have been given to you on the second working day after the date of sending above."
- Sentence 1 contains a claim that you knew to be false on the day it was printed.
- Your decision to follow this false claim with sentence 2's reference to court proceedings reads as an attempt to intimidate me as keeper into believing that you have a legally enforceable right against me as keeper.
- Your decision to surround sentence 2 with "you" sentences directed at me as keeper reads as an attempt to intimidate me as keeper into believing that you can bring debt recovery action, court proceedings and additional charges against me as keeper, if I do not pay the parking charge (as keeper) or identify the driver.
I do not believe that "
obtaining and using keeper details from the DVLA to send false claims and intimidatory language/threats that you already know cannot be enforced against the keeper" is a legitimate enforcement purpose envisaged by the ICO, DVLA or NCP's Cark Park Terms. Your NtK demonstrates inappropriate processing of my personal data and also breaches NCP's Privacy Policy requirements to only process personal data for lawful, fair, legitimate and authorised purposes.
ConclusionAs your NtK is out of time I am unable to help you further with this matter, and look forward to your confirmation that
- The charge has been cancelled;
- You have creased processing my personal data which you only obtained by virtue of my being the registered keeper, as continued processing will cause further damage or distress;
- My personal details have been removed from your systems.
If you choose to decline this appeal, you must issue a POPLA code. Be aware that issuing a POPLA code extends the duration of your data processing breach with a consequential increase in the damage and distress caused to me as a result; and this will be reflected in my complaints to NCP's data protection officer, the ICO and DVLA.
-----------ENDS
[edited to remove coding errors]
