URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
  HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 118117--------------------------------------------------
       Universal Parking Enforcement LTD Parking PCN - Left premise
       while parked 
   DIR By: Far
       Date: May 8, 2026, 9:20 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Around the beginning of may, I received a letter in the mail
       saying I had parked on private property and that the passenger
       and drivers should have remained in the car but didn’t and it
       was a breach of their parking terms. The date of the offense was
       01/04/2026 and the date of sending the notice was listed as
       23/04/2026.
       I appealed this on the fact that they had
       14 days after the offence to submit the notice and they
       rejected my appeal basically admitting yes we did not send it
       within 14 days but you still have to pay because you broke the
       agreed parking terms. I have not disclosed the driver and I am
       unsure of how to continue.
       This was their response to my appeal below:
  HTML https://ibb.co/F4pbcfdY
       #Post#: 118118--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Private Parking Fine appeal rejected now what?
   DIR By: jfollows
       Date: May 8, 2026, 9:25 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Please read
  HTML https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/<br
       />and follow its instructions on how to post images in
       particular.
       Your wall of text is better than nothing but very unpleasant to
       read.
       Your next step will be to appeal to the IAS on the basis of
       non-compliance with PoFA 2012 legislation to transfer liability
       from the unknown driver to the registered keeper.
       Their tactics are to refuse your appeal, lie and bluster in the
       knowledge that many people believe their nonsense and pay up.
       Just continue to ensure you do not identify the driver.
       #Post#: 118152--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Universal Parking Enforcement LTD Parking PCN - Left premise
       while parked 
   DIR By: jfollows
       Date: May 9, 2026, 2:10 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Thanks for updating the image.
       They totally ignore your appeal point, don’t they?
       The notice needed to be dated 13 April or earlier to be deemed
       served within 14 days.
       A simple IAS appeal will cost them £23 and should be that the
       driver has not been identified and that with the claimed breach
       of terms on 1 April, the Notice to Keeper was issued too late to
       use the provisions of PoFA 2012 to transfer liability from the
       driver to the registered keeper.
       I wouldn’t suggest adding other points, because then they will
       ignore the difficult points. It is true that “leaving the site”
       is also pretty unenforceable, but the issue date is a much
       clearer appeal point.
       #Post#: 118164--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Universal Parking Enforcement LTD Parking PCN - Left premise
       while parked 
   DIR By: Far
       Date: May 9, 2026, 5:03 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Yeah it is quite annoying they just literally ignored my point
       and admitted to not following the law but are still trying to
       squeeze money out of me. I have heard that the IAS doesn’t tend
       to favour the person appealing and the appealing success rate is
       quite low. I have appealed with the following message, just
       wondering what would happen next if the IAS also rejected.
       The operator has confirmed in its rejection letter that the
       Notice to Keeper was issued outside the statutory period
       required under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012
       (“PoFA 2012”).
       As the Notice to Keeper was not served within the required
       14-day period, the operator has failed to comply with PoFA 2012
       and cannot transfer liability from the driver to the registered
       keeper.
       The appellant has not identified the driver and is under no
       obligation to do so. The operator has therefore failed to
       establish keeper liability.
       Accordingly, the charge should be cancelled.
       #Post#: 118167--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Universal Parking Enforcement LTD Parking PCN - Left premise
       while parked 
   DIR By: jfollows
       Date: May 9, 2026, 5:55 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       If the IAS doesn’t uphold your appeal, you let them take you to
       court which you will defend. Search the forum for more details.
       #Post#: 118169--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Universal Parking Enforcement LTD Parking PCN - Left premise
       while parked 
   DIR By: tincombe
       Date: May 9, 2026, 6:41 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       The 'notice' please and pl confirm that you are the registered
       keeper*.
       Compliance with PoFA is mandatory only if they wish to hold the
       keeper liable, but their reply is a tad short of being this
       explicit and we know that some PPCs do not rely upon PoFA.
       When we see the notice and your clarification we'll see whether:
       They regard you as being the keeper and the notice purports to
       comply with PoFA, or
       Perhaps you are a hirer*.
       #Post#: 118805--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Universal Parking Enforcement LTD Parking PCN - Left premise
       while parked 
   DIR By: Far
       Date: May 15, 2026, 4:54 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       The notice is here (
  HTML https://ibb.co/zHZbZVYs
       ) and I am the
       registered keeper. I appealed to IAA as said before and they
       have responded with this.
       The operator made their Prima Facie Case on 15/05/2026 22:19:43.
       The operator reported that...
       The appellant was the driver.
       The appellant was the keeper.
       The Notice to Keeper (Non-ANPR) was sent on 23/04/2026.
       The ticket was issued on 01/04/2026.
       The charge is based in Contract.
       The operator made the following comments...
       Please see attached evidence.
  HTML https://ibb.co/zhckv9ks
       #Post#: 118806--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Universal Parking Enforcement LTD Parking PCN - Left premise
       while parked 
   DIR By: Far
       Date: May 15, 2026, 5:02 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I'm thinking of replying with this:
       The operator has failed to establish keeper liability under
       Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (“PoFA 2012”).
       The Notice to Keeper was issued on 23/04/2026 in relation to an
       event dated 01/04/2026. This is outside the statutory 14-day
       period required by Paragraph 9(4) of Schedule 4 PoFA 2012.
       The operator has therefore failed to comply with the mandatory
       conditions required to transfer liability from the unidentified
       driver to the registered keeper.
       The operator now merely asserts that “the appellant was the
       driver” but provides no evidence whatsoever as to the identity
       of the driver.
       No admission as to driver identity has been made.
       The operator’s evidence only shows the vehicle and occupants
       allegedly leaving the site. It does not identify the driver.
       The operator also incorrectly states:
       “It is the responsibility of the registered keeper to prove they
       were not the driver.”
       That is not the legal position. In the absence of PoFA
       compliance, the burden remains on the operator to prove, on the
       balance of probabilities, the identity of the driver. There is
       no lawful presumption that the registered keeper was driving.
       As the operator has failed both:
       1. to comply with PoFA 2012; and
       2. to prove the identity of the driver,
       the appeal must be allowed.
       #Post#: 118807--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Universal Parking Enforcement LTD Parking PCN - Left premise
       while parked 
   DIR By: jfollows
       Date: May 15, 2026, 5:06 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote ---
       > has been provided by the registered keeper to confirm they
       were not the driver. Therefore, based on not receiving any
       evidence to eliminate the registered keeper it is our assumption
       that the registered keeper was the driver. It is
       > the responsibility of the registered keeper to prove they were
       not the driver.
       --- End Quote ---
       is total rubbish, it’s what normal people would call a lie.
       The notice was issued too late to use the provisions of PoFA
       2012 to transfer liability from the driver to the keeper, so as
       long as the driver is not identified the keeper can not be
       liable.
       Your proposed response seems fine.
       The IAS will probably side with the operator, but it doesn’t
       matter other than that you have to put up with the tiresome
       process of them raising a court claim against you. Ultimately
       they will withdraw or lose.
       #Post#: 118826--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Universal Parking Enforcement LTD Parking PCN - Left premise
       while parked 
   DIR By: Sander333
       Date: May 16, 2026, 5:35 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Appeal to IAS but do not anticipate a positive outcome. The
       whole replies from the PPC are farcical implying that the driver
       can be responsible for the actions of passengers. Prepare
       yourself for a number of scary letters and see what happens this
       should die a death before court.
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 1