Free Traffic Legal Advice

Any appeal must be only as the keeper. Do not identify who was driving. There is no legal obligation on the keeper to identify the driver to an unregulated private parking company.

The PE Notice to Keeper (NtK) is not fully compliant with all the requirements of PoFA and so the keeper cannot be liable if the drivers identity is not known by PE.

So, your post should start: "I The keeper received a parking ticket for not paying for parking."

Are you saying that there are no other signs at the location? Any contract is formed by the terms on the signs at the location. They cannot be formed by anything on a website. The contract is formed by conduct, whether the driver bothered to read the signs in situ, or not.

If you can, go back and get some photos of the signs and the general layout.

There is no mention of ParkingEye or any BPA roundel on the sign you have shown us.

Bingo - cheers b789. There was in the thread I'm thinking back to eventually a map discovered, I believe, that defined the scope of the land covered by the byelaws (the one on the first page is not the same one I believe), but from my admittedly hazy memory of the case it was agreed by members that the car park in question was not relevant land.

The GSV images are over 6 years old. However, the main point is that PE have issued an NtK under PoFA. As the location is land under statutory control, it is not relevant land for the purposes of PoFA.

PE are attempting to hold the keeper liable unlawfully. Here is an appeal you should make as the keeper to PE:

Appeal against PCN [PCN Reference Number]

I am writing to formally appeal the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) referenced above, which was issued to me, the registered keeper of vehicle [Vehicle Registration Number] for an alleged parking contravention at the London Aquatic Centre, Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park.

I am challenging this PCN on the following grounds:

1. Land Governed by Byelaws – Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA) Inapplicability

The location where the alleged parking incident occurred is governed by byelaws made under section 164 of the Public Health Act 1875 by the London Borough of Newham, which apply to the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park. As such, the land is under statutory control.

The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 explicitly excludes land under statutory control from its provisions. Consequently, the Notice to Keeper (NtK) issued under PoFA 9(2)(b) is invalid, and it is unlawful for ParkingEye to attempt to hold the registered keeper liable in this instance. I decline to provide the identity of the driver, and as keeper, I have no liability for this parking charge.

2. Breach of the British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Practice

The BPA Code of Practice (CoP) Section 21.2 clearly states that where parking is subject to statutory control (such as areas governed by byelaws), PoFA cannot be used to establish keeper liability. By issuing an NtK citing PoFA on land where it does not apply, ParkingEye is in breach of the BPA CoP. Furthermore, this constitutes a misrepresentation of ParkingEye's authority to enforce parking charges under PoFA, contravening the BPA’s requirement for transparency and fairness.

3. Unlawful Use of My Personal Data – Breach of the KADOE Contract

ParkingEye's request for my data from the DVLA was made under the KADOE contract, which stipulates that data may only be accessed for "Reasonable Cause." Under Section B2.1 of the KADOE contract, Reasonable Cause includes seeking recovery of parking charges in accordance with PoFA or the ATA Code of Practice.

Given that PoFA does not apply to land under statutory control, the use of my data to pursue a PoFA-based charge was not in accordance with the KADOE contract. This constitutes unlawful processing of my data, as there was no legal basis for its use in this context.

[4. Insufficient Details of the Alleged Breach

The NtK fails to specify the exact nature of the contravention, only stating that either "not purchasing the appropriate parking time" or "remaining longer than permitted" occurred. This lack of specificity does not meet the requirements of PoFA Schedule 4, even if PoFA were applicable, and fails to provide sufficient evidence to substantiate the claim.

Requested Actions

In light of the above points, I request that ParkingEye:

Cancel the Parking Charge Notice immediately.
Cease any further contact with me regarding this PCN, aside from confirmation of cancellation.

Please be aware that a separate, formal complaint will be raised with ParkingEye concerning this matter, and I will escalate the complaint to the BPA if not resolved. The unlawful use of my data under the KADOE contract, along with the breaches of the BPA CoP, will form the basis of a separate complaint to the DVLA.

Should this appeal be rejected, please provide a detailed explanation addressing each point raised and a POPLA code for further independent adjudication.

Separately, you must also email the DPO of PE with a data rectification notice instructing them to erase your old address and for them to update their records with your correct address for service. The highlighted words are for a reason and must be used. You do not want them having two possible addresses as that is the most common way people receive CCJs by default.

You also need to update your V5C with your current address. Updating your drivers licence with the DVLA does not automatically update your V5C.

If PE rejected the appeal but subsequently cancelled that does suggest someone somewhere intervened, so your complaint may well have worked.

All's well that ends well - thanks for the update!

Hi there b789,
I received a parking charge from PE issued on14/08/25 by post:
On the 10 August 2025 vehicle XXXX entered the London Aquatics car park at 15:12:31 and departed at 15:37:42 on 10 August 2025.
The signage which is clearly displayed at entrance to and throughout the car park, state that tihis is  private land that the car park is managed by Parkingeye Ltd. In addition the signage states that as a paid parking car park, a Parking Charge is applicable if the motorist fails to make the appropiate tariff payment. The signage also contains further terms and conditions associated with car park by which those park in the car park agree to be bound.
By either not purchasing the appropriate parking time or by remaining at the car park for longer than permitted in accordance with the terms and conditions set out in the signage, The Parking Charge is now payable to Parkingeye Ltd (as the Creditor).
                    ***************
So, I decided to appeal to PE via email on 18/08/25 using the template you provided:

In my appeal I did not mention that I was the driver. Today, 02/09/25  I received their reply via email that my appeal is rejected.

Here is their reply:
Dear Sir / Madam,
Thank you for your appeal in relation to the Parking Charge incurred on 10 August 2025 between 15:12:31 at 15:37, at London Aquatics Centre car park.
We have reviewed the details outlined in your appeal, but we are not in receipt ofsufficient evidence to confirm that the terms and conditions were not breached. Our records confirm that no parking was purchased on the date of the parking event, despite there being payment methods available.
We are writing to advise you that your recent appeal has been unsuccessful and that you have now reached the end of our internal appeals procedure. If you wish to have your case independently assessed, please be advised, there is an independent appeals service (POPLA) which is available to motorists who have had an appeal rejected by a British Parking Association Approved Operator. Contact information
and further information can be found enclosed. See also www.popla.co.uk
By law we are also required to inform you that Ombudsman Services (www.ombudsmanservices.
org/) provides an alternative dispute resolution service that would be competent to deal with your appeal. However, we have not chosen to participate in their alternative dispute resolution service. As such should you wish to appeal then you must do so to POPLA, as explained above.
Please note, if the Parking Charge was issued in Scotland/Northern Ireland, only the driver can appeal to POPLA (Parking on Private Land Appeals). As a gesture of goodwill, we have extended the discount period for a further 14 days from the date of this correspondence. If you appeal to POPLA, you will not be able to pay the discounted amount in settlement of the Parking Charge, and the full value of the charge
will be outstanding. In addition, if your appeal to POPLA is unsuccessful, you will no longer be able to pay the discounted amount and the full value of the charge will be due.
                                  ****************
I wish to mention that this was the first time I have entered the parking plot by mistake as I got lost in the area around the London Olympic/Aquatic Centre. In my confusion and effort to find my way out I was unaware that parking charges would apply. BTW I am Blue Badge holder and 79 years old. 
(the above has not been mentioned in my appeal to PE since I have not mentioned that I was the driver).

Questions:
1) How do I go from here?
2) Appeal using POPLA?
3 Approach the Aquatic Centre CS ?

Please start your own thread rather than jumping on someone else’s thread.
https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/
Also please don’t expect or call out individuals to respond. @b789 is great but isn’t your servant.

Sorry, this is my first time on this forum and I find the technics quite tricky.