Hi all,
This PCN was put on the windscreen of my vehicle (I am the keeper but was not the driver). The driver drove into an estate with no entrance signage or ANPR, went looking for a sign to read the terms, in the 60 seconds they had left the vehicle to do this a PCN was on the window.
I'm guessing this is why the observed from time is "N/A" but regardless the time was way shorter than how long it would take someone to find and read a sign.
Appreciate any advice and thanks!
PCN
Entrance from google maps
Entrance pics I took
Only sign on site - about 8/9 ft up
Please do not redact any dates. The Notice to Driver (NtD) is not compliant with PoFA and so they cannot hold the Keeper liable. They do not know the drivers identity and, as the Keeper, whether you were the driver or not, you must not provide that information, inadvertently or otherwise.
There is no legal obligation on the Keeper to identify the drivers identity and to an unregulated private parking company. Always refer to the drivers identity and in the third person. No “I parked here or there”, only “the driver parked here or there”.
For now, you do nothing. On day 27 after the date of the PCN you will appeal it, only as the Keeper. We will give you the necessary wording to use.
The reason for this is that some parking companies will respond to the appeal without issuing a Notice to Keeper (NtK) which is yet another breach of PoFA which can be used against them at POPLA or even in court as they will always reject the initial appeal anyway.
So, do you require assistance with the initial appeal which will need to be submitted electronically on day 27 (which is another reason we need all dates and times un-redacted?
And another issue of the £100 been hidden in the small print.
And another issue of the £100 been hidden in the small print.
Yes... but they will not consider that at initial appeal stage. That can be considered at POPLA and, if necessary at court.
No contract was formed with that woefully inadequate signage.
Please do not redact any dates.
Yes sorry went a bit OTT with the PII removal. It was on 15 Feb and yes I am not the driver just the keeper.
What do I write in the appeal since it sounds like they will automatically knock me back?
SO, on Friday 7th March submit the following appeal, only as the Keeper:
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 formal complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner.
Your Notice to Driver (NtD) fails to comply with the requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA). Specifically, it does not specify a "period of parking", only an instant in time. As a result, you cannot transfer liability to the registered keeper. The burden of proving who was driving does not rest with the keeper, and there will be no admission as to the identity of the driver. No assumptions or inferences can be made in this regard.
Since liability cannot be established against the keeper, you must either pursue the driver (who I am under no legal obligation to identify) or cancel this charge. Should you choose to reject this appeal, I require you to provide a full explanation of how you believe the NtD complies with PoFA in every respect.
Elite Park Management have no hope at POPLA and so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.
Received this very short and 0 rational rejection. It came with a POPLA code how should I formulate a POPLA appeal?
Why do you keep on removing dates? It might not be relevant here, but I can’t see how revealing them is in any way problematic!
Yeah sorry a bit too cautious on my end. If in doubt I'd rather remove and reveal later.
Please take your tin foil hat off if you want our assistance and advice. The dates of any notice are highly relevant when working out any PoFA breaches.
There is no dark room somewhere, filled with hooded youths scouring the internet for your post about a PCN ad then doing something ( I can't imagine what) which that information.
So, what was the date the NtD was issued? The reason this is required is because paragraph 8(5) of PoFA comes into play. If you're going to make it difficult for us, then you can go look up what that paragraph is and figure out why.
This should be straightforward for POPLA. The NtD is not compliant with PoFA 7(2)(a). No NtK has been issued... yet!
This is why we need all the dates. On or after Wednesday 9th April, you should submit the following appeal to POPLA, only as the Keeper. DO NOT submit a POPLA appeal before Wednesday 9th April.
Use this as your POPLA appeal:
The appellant is the registered keeper and is under no legal obligation to identify the driver. The operator has failed to comply with the requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA), and therefore keeper liability does not apply. As such, the burden remains with the operator to prove who was driving. The POPLA assessor is reminded that no adverse inference may be drawn from the keeper’s silence, and no assumption may be made that the keeper was the driver. This position is supported by persuasive authority in VCS v Edward (2023) [H0KF6C9C], where the court confirmed that the Protection of Freedoms Act does not create any presumption that the registered keeper was the driver, and that to infer such a link in the absence of evidence would be wrong in law.
1. Non-compliant Notice to Driver – Breach of PoFA Schedule 4, Paragraph 7(2)(a)
The operator issued a Notice to Driver (NtD) on 15 February 2025, which purports to rely on PoFA for keeper liability. However, the NtD fails to comply with the mandatory requirement in Paragraph 7(2)(a), which states that the NtD must:
“specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates.”
In this case, the NtD merely stated an “observed time from: N/A” and an “observed time to: 10:40”, with no measurable or defined period of parking. This omission is fatal to PoFA compliance under Paragraph 7(2)(a), which requires the notice to specify a “period of parking”. A single point in time does not demonstrate how long the vehicle remained on site, nor whether the driver stayed beyond the minimum consideration period typically required to review signage and decide whether to accept the terms. Without any evidence of duration, it is not possible to establish whether a parking contract could have been formed at all.
This position is supported by the persuasive appellate judgment in Brennan v Premier Parking Solutions 2023) [H6DP632H], where HHJ Mitchell confirmed that a timestamp or single photograph cannot satisfy the requirement to specify a “period of parking”. He emphasised that a parking event must involve a period of time, however short, and that a momentary presence does not demonstrate acceptance of any terms. Without such evidence, no contractual liability arises, and no keeper liability can flow under PoFA.
2. No Notice to Keeper Given Within the Relevant Period – PoFA Schedule 4, Paragraph 8(4) and 8(5)
As a NtD was issued, the operator must serve a Notice to Keeper (NtK) that complies with PoFA Paragraph 8. Paragraph 8(4) requires that the NtK be given (i.e. delivered) within the “relevant period” defined in Paragraph 8(5), which is the 28 days following the expiry of 28 days from the day after the NtD was given.
• NtD issued: 15 February 2025
• Relevant period ends: 12 April 2025
• As 12 April 2025 falls on a Saturday, and deemed service applies only on working days, the last date for posting a NtK (to be deemed delivered on time) would be Wednesday, 9 April 2025.
As of the date of this appeal (9 April 2025), no NtK has been received, and none could now be served in time. Any NtK posted now would be deemed delivered after the relevant period ends, and thus fail the requirements of Paragraph 8(4).
3. No Evidence That a Contract Could Have Been Formed
The operator has also failed to demonstrate that a parking contract could have been formed. The absence of a recorded period of parking means there is no evidence that the vehicle remained on site for longer than the minimum consideration period — the industry-standard period during which a driver is entitled to read and consider the terms displayed on signage before deciding whether to accept the contractual terms and remain parked. A brief presence on site, evidenced only by a single timestamp, is not sufficient to demonstrate acceptance of contractual terms. The burden rests with the operator to show that the driver had time and opportunity to consider the terms and chose to remain, thereby forming a contract. In the absence of such evidence, no contract could have been formed, and no liability — contractual or statutory — can arise.
Conclusion
As the Notice to Driver was non-compliant under Paragraph 7(2)(a), and no valid Notice to Keeper has been given within the timeframe required by Paragraph 8 and that there is absolutely no evidence that a contract was entered into by the conduct of the driver, the operator has no lawful basis to pursue the registered keeper. The appeal must therefore be allowed.
Submitted to POPLA and the operator has now uploaded the case summary below as well as a 30 page PDF of photos and text.
Doesn't make sense to me and the English seems a little broken in places like "Dvla legally send elite the keeper details" I didn't even know they had asked the DVLA for the registered keepers details.
Operator Case Summary
The motorist has said POPLA code: XYZ - PCN: ABC - Vehicle Reg XX
Dear POPLA assessor, The appellant is the registered keeper and is under no legal obligation to identify the driver. The operator has failed to comply with the requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA), and therefore keeper liability does not apply. As such, the burden remains with the operator to prove who was driving. The POPLA assessor is reminded that no adverse inference may be drawn from the keeper’s silence, and no assumption may be made that the keeper was the driver. However, Dvla legally send elite the keeper details. Therefore, it is the keepers liability to send us the details of the driver at the time of the offence, if the keeper does not challenge this the case will then be kept as the keepers details.
Shall I try upload the PDF here?
Upload the evidence using either DropBox or Google Drive. Make sure you allow access to anyone. Remember to redact only your personal info and the PCN number and your VRM. Leave everything else visible.
Issue Date: 15 Feb 2025
Agree x 1
View List