Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hi all,

I'm looking for some guidance on the following situation. I'll bullet point it otherwise I'll end up writing a novel;

I pulled into a Shell garage at 23:05 back on 18th October 2025.
I walked offsite to a takeaway next door to the garage to collect some food - I was parked for around 10 mins.
I received a Notice to Keeper dated 30th January 2026  - Uploaded.
I have checked their evidence, they have pictures of my vehicle stationary, time-stamped and even show me returning to the vehicle with my food - I'll upload these.
Since receiving it, I have gone back to the site in question to check signage - there is plenty of it, however it blends in perfectly with the car wash signage (all red and yellow) and does not stand out all.
They want £100, reduced to £60, but I think I've run out of the discount period.
I have not responded or identified myself as the driver, but they literally have a photo of me!

Anyway, please advise me. Should I just pay this off or can I beat this?

links to photos and NTK;
https://ibb.co/wFJ0H7N3
https://ibb.co/v44xmbXg
https://ibb.co/xSwyVWc9
https://ibb.co/rKTLbQ6x
https://ibb.co/VW1x1yPh

TIA

I'm the registered keeper, my name is on the log book. The photo is not evidence that i was the driver?

MSE recommeds sending this template "I dispute your 'parking charge', as the keeper of the vehicle. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. Since your PCN is a vague template, I require an explanation of the allegation and your evidence. You must include a close up actual photograph of the sign you contend was at the location on the material date as well as your images of the vehicle.

If the allegation concerns a PDT machine, the data supplied in response to this appeal must include the record of payments made - showing partial VRNs - and an explanation of the reason for the PCN, because your Notice does not explain it.

If the allegation involves an alleged overstay of minutes, your evidence must include the actual grace period agreed by the landowner."

Is this applicable to me?

I love this. You're my kind of guy. You found the perfect balance of professionalism and mockery.

I love you anyway, thank you for responding and advising so quickly. So I'm good to copy and paste that and send it off straightaway?

You know I was going to just pay it, but I absolutely hate these blood suckers. Thanks for your help thus far, I'll be back when they send the heavies around.

Personally, I would send a short appeal to the IAS, stating that your appeal point was ignored by UPE and therefore implicitly agreed with, that with dates of

alleged offence 18/10/25
notice issued by UPE 30/1/26

they can not invoke PoFA 2012 to transfer liability from the driver to you, the registered keeper.

All other points made by UPE in their rejection of your appeal are irrelevant, and the notice should be cancelled by the IAS.

Whether or not the IAS upholds your appeal doesn’t ultimately matter, but if not you will have to put up with debt collectors and probably court paperwork until they give up.

There’s probably a better form of wording so don’t rush, wait for other input.

If you want to pick up on their nonsense about issuing a postal notice within seven months, the truth is that under contract law they can start proceedings against the driver within six years, but only against the registered keeper if they comply with PoFA, which they haven’t. Stating something as a fact when it isn’t is another common tactic of these companies.

104 days from offence to NTK issue date?

That must be a record for incompetency 

104 days from offence to NTK issue date?

That must be a record for incompetency 

Thank you for this Brenda, this makes me feel better that I have grounds to tell them to shove it!

Show us a draft before sending anything. The idea is to make it unarguably clear that they have not complied with PoFA (easy given the dates!) and that as such there is no keeper liability.

This is what I came up with and then asked ChatGPT to clean up. Let me know if it's ok!


"I am the registered keeper and I am not liable for this charge.

My original appeal clearly stated that the Notice to Keeper does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4, yet the operator’s rejection failed to address this point at all.

The dates are:

Alleged parking event: 18/10/2025

Notice to Keeper issued: 30/01/2026

This is 104 days after the event.

Under PoFA:

Paragraph 9(4) requires delivery of a Notice to Keeper within 14 days where no windscreen ticket was served

Paragraph 8(5) requires delivery between 29 and 56 days where a windscreen ticket was served

A Notice to Keeper issued after 104 days is non-compliant under either scenario.

Because the statutory conditions have not been met, the operator cannot transfer liability from the driver to the keeper.

I am under no legal obligation to identify the driver and will not be doing so. There is no legal presumption that the keeper was the driver.

The operator’s statement that a postal PCN can be issued within “7 months” is incorrect in law and does not override PoFA. It is therefore irrelevant to keeper liability.

As the operator has failed to establish keeper liability, this charge is unenforceable against me.

I respectfully request that the appeal be allowed and the PCN cancelled."

In addition, is it best to submit this appeal asap or on day 21 (I don't know if it makes any difference)

TIA