Free Traffic Legal Advice

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 IAS, so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.

Subject: Formal Complaint – Failure to Consider Keeper Appeal in Breach of the PPSCoP

Dear Sir/Madam,

I write to formally complain about PCM’s failure to consider my appeal against Parking Charge Notice [PCN reference number], in clear breach of the Private Parking Single Code of Practice (PPSCoP) v1.1, which constitutes a serious non-compliance issue and a potential breach of PCM’s KADOE agreement with the DVLA.

Background

• A Notice to Driver (NtD) was issued on 12th January 2025.
• As the Registered Keeper, I submitted a timely appeal on 8th February 2025.
• PCM refused to process my appeal, claiming that as I had not identified the driver, I had to wait until an NtK was issued following a DVLA data request.
• PCM then issued an NtK on 24th February 2025 without allowing any appeal option—only demanding payment or driver identification.

PCM’s Breach of the PPSCoP

1. Failure to Consider My Appeal as the Registered Keeper

PCM’s refusal to process my appeal was a direct breach of Annex C of the PPSCoP, which explicitly states:

"Where an NTK follows an NTD, the keeper or hirer may appeal the parking charge if the driver has not previously been given the opportunity to appeal."

• The driver did not appeal the NtD.
• As the Registered Keeper, I had an absolute right to appeal the PCN.
• PCM had no justification to refuse my appeal or demand DVLA verification before considering it.

2. Procedural Abuse – Issuing an NtK Without an Appeal Option

Under Section 8.4 of the PPSCoP, PCM is required to provide a process for motorists to appeal a Parking Charge Notice. PCM’s NtK failed to offer this, instead presenting only the option to pay or name the driver.

This is a serious procedural failing that obstructs the appeals process and violates the standards required for fair enforcement under the PPSCoP.

Required Action

PCM must immediately:

1. Acknowledge this complaint in writing within 14 days, as per the PPSCoP.
2. Confirm that my original appeal is now being properly processed in accordance with the Code.
3. Provide a substantive response within 28 days, either cancelling the PCN or issuing a formal rejection with details of further appeal options.

Next Steps if PCM Fails to Comply

Should PCM fail to rectify this situation, I will escalate this as a formal complaint to the DVLA, as your failure to comply with the PPSCoP is a breach of your KADOE agreement. This could result in sanctions against PCM, including suspension from DVLA data access.

I expect your urgent attention to this matter and await your response.

Yours faithfully,

[Your Name]

Send a formal complaint to PCM as follows:

So, are you saying that the have sent you copies of the same documents you previously showed us? I see that there is an extra page you've shown which does have appeal information on it. Is that the back of one of the documents you previously showed us or is it a separate page that was not included originally?