Free Traffic Legal Advice

Subject: Formal Complaint – Failure to Issue a Compliant Notice to Keeper (PCN: [PCN Number])

Dear ParkingEye Complaints Department,

I am writing to raise a formal complaint regarding the handling of Parking Charge Notice (PCN) reference [PCN Number], issued in relation to vehicle registration [Vehicle Registration]. I have recently received a Reminder Notice, but I must make it clear that I did not receive the original Notice to Keeper (NtK) that you claim was sent.

As the registered keeper of the vehicle, I am fully aware that under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA), you are required to serve a valid NtK within 14 days of the alleged parking event in order to transfer liability to the keeper. Since no NtK was received, your Reminder Notice does not meet the requirements of PoFA.

I now require strict proof that the original NtK was both issued and delivered in compliance with PoFA. This proof must include:

• A copy of the original NtK, and

Either:

• Proof of posting (such as a Royal Mail Certificate of Posting), or

•Proof of delivery (such as tracking details or confirmation of receipt).

For the avoidance of doubt, this is a formal complaint, not an appeal. I am not appealing the PCN at this stage, and any attempt to treat this complaint as an appeal would be inappropriate and contrary to my stated intent. I require the information requested in order to fully assess whether the Notice to Keeper you claim to have sent was compliant with PoFA.

Should you fail to provide strict proof of compliance with PoFA, you must acknowledge that keeper liability cannot be enforced, and I require confirmation that you will cease pursuing me, as the registered keeper, for this charge.

Please note that any continued pursuit of keeper liability without providing the requested proof will constitute a procedural failure on your part. I reserve the right to escalate this matter to the British Parking Association (BPA), the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), and refer to it in any formal defence or counterclaim should you attempt to take this matter further.

I expect you to give this matter your immediate attention and provide a copy of the original NtK along with the requested evidence of its issuance and delivery.

Yours sincerely,

[Your Name]
Registered Keeper

British Parking Association (BPA) Compliance Department 
Haywards Heath Business Park 
4th Floor, West Point 
78 Queens Road 
Haywards Heath, RH16 1EB 

Subject: Formal Complaint: BPA Response Misrepresenting PoFA Compliance & Code of Practice Obligations 

Dear BPA Compliance Team, 

I am writing to formally challenge your response to my complaint regarding the private parking operator’s failure to comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) and the Private Parking Single Code of Practice (PPSCoP) Section 8.1.2(e) Note 2. Your response was not only evasive but also misleading in its selective quoting of the BPA’s own Code of Practice. Given the serious nature of this matter, I request a substantive response that properly addresses the concerns raised. 

---

 

1. Background & Facts 

I initially raised a complaint about the failure of a BPA member operator to comply with PoFA’s delivery requirements for a Notice to Keeper (NtK). The BPA responded by quoting PPSCoP 8.1.2(e) Note 2, stating that a notice is presumed to be delivered two working days after posting unless proven otherwise. However, your response conveniently omitted the second half of the same Note, which clearly states: 

Quote

“Therefore, parking operators must retain a record of the date of posting of a notice, not simply of that notice having been generated (e.g. the date that any third-party Mail Consolidator actually put it in the postal system).”

 

This omission is crucial, as it misrepresents the obligations placed upon operators and attempts to shift the burden of proof onto motorists rather than ensuring compliance from your members. 

---

 

2. Legal Violations 

Your failure to acknowledge the full text of PPSCoP 8.1.2(e) Note 2 directly contradicts the BPA’s role as a regulatory body overseeing fair enforcement practices. The following issues arise: 

 
1. Failure to Ensure Code of Practice Compliance: The operator is required to retain proof of the actual date of posting, not simply the date the notice was generated. Your response does not confirm whether the operator has provided this proof. 

2. Improper Burden of Proof Allocation: By stating that it is up to the motorist to disprove the presumption of delivery, you ignore the requirement that the operator must retain and provide evidence of posting before such a presumption can apply. 

3. Regulatory Oversight Failure: If the BPA does not enforce this requirement, it undermines the integrity of the entire enforcement framework and calls into question its role as a regulatory body. 

 

---

 

3. Requested BPA Actions 

In light of the above, I request that the BPA: 

 
1. Provide a clear response on why the second half of PPSCoP 8.1.2(e) Note 2 was omitted from your reply, given its direct relevance to this complaint. 

2. Confirm whether the parking operator has retained actual proof of posting and, if not, explain what regulatory action the BPA intends to take. 

3. Clarify the BPA’s position on compliance enforcement regarding PoFA and whether it acknowledges that the presumption of delivery can only apply if the operator first provides proof of the actual posting date. 

4. Confirm what steps the BPA will take to prevent misleading responses in future complaints, as this selective quoting severely undermines trust in the BPA’s role as an oversight body. 

 

---

 

4. Next Steps if BPA Fails to Act 

If the BPA fails to address these concerns satisfactorily, I will escalate this matter to: 

 
• The DVLA, to report the BPA’s failure to enforce its members’ requirement to keep proof of actual posting of notices, which is necessary to establish the presumption of delivery. 

• My Member of Parliament (MP) and the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG), to highlight BPA’s failure to enforce its own Code of Practice and to bring this matter to the attention of those processing the upcoming Private Parking (Code of Practice) Act 2019. 

• Relevant consumer rights and regulatory bodies, including the ICO if necessary. 

 

I trust the BPA will handle this matter with the seriousness it warrants and look forward to your detailed response within 14 days. Should you require any further clarification, I am happy to provide it. 

Yours sincerely, 

[Your Full Name]