Free Traffic Legal Advice

Where is the signage that informs the driver they are entering private land as they turn right on Holdford Road?

This wouldn't stand a chance if it were ever to go to a county court hearing. As this is just the kangaroo court that is the IAS, don't worry about it.

Does the timestamp on the first photo on the NtK match the timestamp at the bottom of it?

I've also just noticed the following wording by the operator on the adjudicator portal

The operator made their Prima Facie Case on 30/09/2025 13:09:36.

The operator reported that...
ANPR/CCTV was used.
The Notice to Keeper was sent on 18/09/2025.
A response was received from the Notice to Keeper.
The ticket was issued on 14/09/2025.
The Notice to Keeper (ANPR) was sent in accordance with PoFA.
The charge is based in Contract.

The operator made the following comments...
There are clear signs on this route that this area is a no parking area which can be seen in the photographic evidence circled in red. This is at the landowners request as the area is an access route.

As you can see the vehicle remained parked on this route. It is the drivers sole responsibility to ensure they are adhering to these terms and conditions.

This parking charge has been issued in line with PoFa 2012 and so UKPS will continue to hold the registered keeper liable.

As a result this parking charge was issued correctly.

Thanks, I'm attempting to paste the points you raise on my final response to the Operator but the IAS portal on this section doesn't appear to allow the pasting of text. Is this correct ?

To get around this to save me the time of re-typing everything, I was going to attach my response as a word document, informing the IAS in the response box why I have done this, would this be in order ?   

thanks I'll give that a try

You were warned that the IAS is a kangaroo court. Their decision is not binding on you and you DO NOT pay it.

These points have not been addressed by the 'barista' that penned that response:

1. Keeper liability not addressed. Your core PoFA points (no period of parking, no relevant land, defective 9(2)(e)(i)/(f), posting) weren’t engaged with. If PoFA fails, the keeper cannot be liable—full stop—so signage/behaviour is irrelevant to the keeper.
2. Prohibitive signage = no contract. “Controlled land – no parking” is prohibitive. That is not an offer capable of acceptance; it sounds in trespass (if anything) and only the landholder could sue for nominal loss. Contractual “charges” don’t flow from a prohibition.
3. Unsupported factual findings. The adjudicator states the driver “parked,” “left the vehicle,” returned at 13:53, then drove off. Unless the operator filed continuous video or patrol notes, that’s speculation from entry/exit timestamps, not proof of a parking period exceeding any consideration/grace time.
4. Landowner authority ignored. No contemporaneous, signed agreement meeting PPSCoP §14.1(a)–(j) appears to have been produced. That goes to standing. It was side-stepped.
5. Period of parking still missing. A padded single timestamp (“immediately preceding… 13:54”) is not a PoFA 9(2)(a) “period of parking”. Your Brennan point stands.
6. Site identification gap. If the NtK only said “Nova” without a full address/postcode, 9(2)(a) “relevant land” identification fails.

You can now safely ignore all debt recovery letters that are going to come your way. Debt collectors are powerless to do anything except to try and intimidate the low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree to pay up out of ignorance and fear.

Come back if/when you receive a Letter of Claim (LoC).