So, to summarise... The Keeper has received a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) from ParkingEye for an alleged overstay of 19 minutes in a McDonald’s car park. The PCN was initially sent to the Keeper’s old address because the V5C had not been updated with the new address at the time ParkingEye requested the data from the DVLA. The notice has only recently come to light after being passed on. You are assisting the Keeper in dealing with this matter, as they are unable to handle it themselves due to disability, including neurodivergent and mental health-related issues.
This is not a fine. It is a private invoice alleging a contractual breach. ParkingEye is seeking to hold the Keeper liable under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA). However, their Notice to Keeper does not fully comply with PoFA. It fails to meet the requirement in paragraph 9(2)(e)(i), which states that the notice must include a specific "invitation" to the Keeper to pay the unpaid parking charge if, after 28 days, the operator does not know the name and address of the driver. Because this required wording is missing, the notice is not PoFA-compliant. That means ParkingEye cannot transfer liability from the unknown driver to the Keeper.
The Keeper must not identify the driver. The operator cannot legally assume that the Keeper and the driver are the same person, and there is no obligation to disclose the driver’s identity. All references to the driver must be made in the third person.
The Keeper has 28 days from the date the notice was received to submit an appeal. This does not mean 28 days from the issue date printed on the notice. Paragraph 9(6) of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 states that a notice sent by post is presumed to have been “given” to the Keeper two working days after it is posted. However, this is a rebuttable presumption. It only applies unless the contrary is proved. In this case, the notice was sent to the Keeper’s old address and was only later passed on after a delay. That delay rebuts the statutory presumption of delivery. The notice cannot be considered “given” until the Keeper actually received it. The 28-day appeal window begins from that actual date of receipt. Although the operator acted lawfully by using the address held by the DVLA at the time, PoFA still requires that the notice be actually “given” to the Keeper within the prescribed period to create liability. If the notice was not received within that time, then the operator cannot rely on PoFA to hold the Keeper liable, even if the delivery failure resulted from the Keeper’s own delay in updating their DVLA record.
The first step is for the Keeper to submit a Data Rectification Notice (DRN) under Article 16 of the UK GDPR. This notice instructs ParkingEye to rectify the Keeper’s personal data by updating the address on file. It must specify that the previous address is no longer valid for service and require confirmation that all future correspondence, including any legal proceedings, will be sent to the new correct address. This protects the Keeper from any claim being sent to the wrong address and potentially resulting in a default County Court Judgment (CCJ).
The Keeper should also submit an appeal, stating that the Notice to Keeper is not PoFA-compliant on two grounds. First, it was not “given” to the Keeper within the time required by paragraph 9(4), because it was sent to an old address and only received much later after being passed on. Although the operator used the address held by the DVLA at the time, the Keeper had only updated their driving licence and was unaware that the vehicle logbook (V5C) required a separate update. This is a common mistake and was corrected as soon as it was discovered. Second, the notice fails to include the statutory invitation required under paragraph 9(2)(e)(i), which means the operator cannot rely on PoFA to transfer liability to the Keeper. Because PoFA has not been complied with, the Keeper cannot be held liable. The appeal may also raise further arguments, including that the signage was unclear, particularly late at night, and that there was no visible or accessible way to pay for extending the stay. The driver, who remains unnamed, has a disability and would be considered a protected person under the Equality Act 2010. As such, the operator has a duty to make reasonable adjustments. These issues should be considered in any fair and lawful enforcement process.
If ParkingEye rejects the appeal, the next step is to submit an appeal to POPLA, the independent adjudication service. As long as the appeal is submitted by the Keeper without revealing the identity of the driver, and the PoFA non-compliance is clearly raised, there is a strong chance the POPLA appeal will be upheld.
If POPLA does not allow the appeal, the case may still not be over. ParkingEye would then typically pass the matter to debt recovery firms, who will send a stream of threatening letters. These letters can safely be ignored. Debt collectors have no enforcement powers and cannot take legal action. If the matter is not resolved at that stage, it may eventually be escalated to a county court claim. This is not something to be feared.
The county court is simply the final stage in the dispute resolution process. In most cases, claims are either struck out or discontinued before a hearing ever takes place. ParkingEye and its legal agents often fail to follow up or proceed properly, especially when a robust defence has been filed. Even in the rare case that the matter proceeds all the way to a hearing, there is still a realistic chance of success for the Keeper, particularly if the PoFA issue is properly raised and the driver has not been identified. The judge will assess the facts and legal compliance of the Notice to Keeper and the signage.
In summary, the Keeper should first issue a Data Rectification Notice to ensure all correspondence goes to the correct address. They should then appeal within 28 days of receiving the notice, arguing that the NtK is not PoFA-compliant and that no Keeper liability can arise. The Keeper should decline name the driver. If the appeal is rejected, escalate to POPLA. If POPLA also rejects the appeal, the Keeper can choose to defend a county court claim if it arises. The process should be managed calmly and methodically. If you require assistance drafting the DRN or the appeal text, let us know.
