Free Traffic Legal Advice

You need to show us the whole go the Notice to Driver (NtD) that was affixed to the vehicle. The wording on it is critical.

Have you or the resident you were visiting approached the management company that contracted PCM and explained the situation to them and asked them to get their agent to cancel the PCN?

From what we've seen so far, they are on very shaky ground because of some PoFA failures in the NtD. PCM have no idea who the driver is and, as there is no legal obligation on the Keeper of the vehicle to identify the driver to an unregulated private parking company, you should not do so, inadvertently or otherwise. As the Keeper of the vehicle you always refer to the driver in the third person. Not "I did this or that". Always refer to "The driver did this or that".

Have you checked their website for other evidential photos? Go as though to appeal, but do not appeal yet. If there are other photos, please show them to us.

On the 7th February (put this date in your calendar), you appeal on their website but only as the Keeper of the vehicle. Use the following as your appeal and do not change anything:

I am the keeper of the vehicle and I dispute your 'parking charge'. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner.

As your Notice to Driver (NtD) does not fully comply with ALL the requirements of PoFA 2012, you are unable to hold the keeper of the vehicle liable for the charge. Partial or even substantial compliance is not sufficient. There will be no admission as to who was driving and no inference or assumptions can be drawn. PCM 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 NtD can only hold the driver liable. PCN have no hope at IAS, so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.

It will be rejected but it establishes the boundaries and how this will be fought and won.

Not to worry. The NtD is not PoFA compliant and they cannot transfer liability to the Keeper. Wait for their appeal rejection.

You are only appealing as the Keeper. They are going to get your details as the Registered Keeper anyway if you don't appeal and then send you a Notice to Keeper (NtK).

So, if they will only accept the appeal by email, then you use the following and save it as a PDF and attach it to the email. Just checked their site and you can simply copy and paste the appeal that has been provided below.

Do not identify the driver... 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 NtK is not compliant with all the requirements 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 keeper of the vehicle and I dispute your 'parking charge'. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner.

As your Notice to Driver (NtD) does not fully comply with ALL the requirements of PoFA 2012, you are unable to hold the keeper of the vehicle liable for the charge. Partial or even substantial compliance is not sufficient. There will be no admission as to who was driving and no inference or assumptions can be drawn. PCM 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 NtD can only hold the driver liable. PCM have no hope at POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.

Hello, I have received two letters from them about the PCN and would greatly appreciate your guidance.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

OK. As it is not worth the effort of appealing to the IAS, send the following as a formal complaint to PCM. Email it as a pdf attachment to: info@pcm-uk.co.uk and CC in yourself.

PCM (UK) Ltd
Compliance Team
The Courtyard
1A Cranbourne Road
Slough
SL1 2XF

By email to: info@pcm-uk.co.uk

[date]

Subject: Formal Complaint – Procedural and Legal Breaches in PCN [PC31531159]

Dear Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd,

This is a formal complaint, not an appeal. You are required to respond to this complaint in line with Section 11.3 of the BPA/IPC Private Parking Single Code of Practice (PPSCoP).

Your Notice to Keeper (NtK) dated 19/02/2025 falsely claims that you can hold me liable as the registered keeper under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA). However, this claim is legally incorrect because the NtK fails to meet the mandatory conditions set out in PoFA paragraph 8(2)(a).

1. Breach of PoFA – Keeper Liability Cannot Apply

The NtK fails to comply with PoFA on two fundamental points:

• Failure to Specify ‘Relevant Land’ – Breach of PoFA 8(2)(a)The NtK refers only to “Queens Road Estate”, which is an ambiguous and undefined location. PoFA requires the full and precise location of the alleged contravention to be clearly stated. The absence of such information means keeper liability cannot be established.

• Failure to Specify a ‘Period of Parking’ – Breach of PoFA 8(2)(a)The NtK states:

“This charge relates to the period of parking that immediately preceded the time of issue.”

This is legally insufficient. A single timestamp (14:56) does not establish a period of parking. As confirmed in Brennan v Premier Parking Solutions (2023), PoFA requires a defined period, not merely an assumption that parking occurred before a given moment.

2. Breach of the BPA/IPC Private Parking Single Code of Practice (PPSCoP)

Your NtK falsely states:

“Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd have the right to recover the unpaid charges from you, as the registered keeper.”

Given that your NtK fails PoFA 8(2)(a), this is a misrepresentation of keeper liability and a breach of PPSCoP Section 8.1.1(d), which prohibits misleading statements regarding PoFA compliance.

Additionally, PPSCoP Section 8.1.2(e) Note 2 mandates that you retain a record of the date of posting of a notice, not merely the date of generation (e.g., the actual date that any third-party Mail Consolidator placed it into the postal system). I require you to supply:

• A copy of the proof of posting (e.g., a Post Office receipt or mailing log).

• Confirmation that the notice was sent by First Class post (or an equivalent service) that guarantees delivery within 1-2 working days.

• Full disclosure of the method used to send the NtK, including any involvement of a third-party Mail Consolidator.

Failure to provide this evidence will be treated as further proof of non-compliance and will be escalated as part of my formal complaint to the DVLA regarding your misuse of keeper data under the KADOE contract.

3. Breach of the DVLA KADOE Contract

As you have accessed my personal data from the DVLA, you are bound by the Keeper at Date of Event (KADOE) contract, which explicitly requires compliance with PoFA and the relevant Code of Practice. Given that:

• Your NtK is not PoFA-compliant

• You have misrepresented keeper liability

• You have failed to comply with the PPSCoP

You are in clear breach of the KADOE contract under which DVLA data is provided.

As such, I am submitting a formal complaint to the DVLA regarding your misuse of keeper data, seeking an investigation into your continued access to the DVLA database.

4. Demands and Next Steps

1. Given your multiple procedural and legal breaches, I formally require that you:

2. Cancel this charge immediately and confirm this in writing.

3. Acknowledge that no keeper liability exists under PoFA and confirm that you will not pursue me as the registered keeper.

4. Provide the required evidence of the actual date of posting as per PPSCoP 8.1.2(e) Note 2, including proof that the NtK was sent via a First Class service or equivalent.

Provide a full response within 14 days, or this matter will be escalated to:

• The DVLA, for your KADOE contract breach

• The International Parking Community (IPC), for your PPSCoP violations

• Trading Standards, for your misrepresentation of legal obligations

Failure to provide a full response within 14 days will result in immediate escalation.

Sincerely,

[Your Name]
Registered Keeper

I got the following respond from them: As your correspondence constitutes a dispute against the parking charge, this will be allocated to your case for the Appeals Team to review

You should expect a response within 14 days


Hope this is as expected

 

Good morning
I got the following reply from them:

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]