Free Traffic Legal Advice

I've drafted the following appeal, taken template from Gatwick. Do the same type of bylaws apply to North Greenwich Main due to the land ownership?


I am the registered keeper. Saba Park Services UK Limited cannot hold a registered keeper liable for any alleged contravention on land that is under statutory control. As a matter of fact and law, Saba Park Services UK Limited will be well aware that they cannot use the PoFA provisions because North Greenwich Main is not 'relevant land'.

If Transport for London wanted to hold owners or keepers liable under Railway 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 Saba Park Services UK Limited is not the landowner and your 'parking charge' is not and never attempts to be a penalty. It is created for Saba Park Services UK Limited’s own profit (as opposed to a bylaws penalty that goes to the public purse) and Saba Park Services UK Limited 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 Notice to Keeper can only hold the driver liable. I formally demand the immediate cancellation of the PCN due to proven payment and lack of Keeper liability and written confirmation within that the charge has been cancelled.

I expect written confirmation within 7 days that this matter is closed

END


As @b789 pointed out on the other thread he "examined the NtK, “North Greenwich Main” is land under statutory control covered by bylaws. The car park is owned by TfL and can be easily checked here:

https://tfl.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=5129c766255941d3be16a6828faa8f18

SABA are in breach of their ATAs BPA CoP by issuing a PCN stating that they have a right under PoFA to hold the keeper/hirer liable if they do not know the identity and address for service of the driver.

PoFA 3(1)(b) applies. 3(2)© applies."

Should I include that in my appeal?

Is the notice you received a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) or a fake Penalty Notice (PN) purporting to be for a breach of railway byelaws?

If the former, then you can use the same response as for airports, adapted as necessary. However, if it is a fake Penalty Notice (PN) then, no you can't use the airport appeal adapted as required.

So, which is it?