DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 126988--------------------------------------------------
Britannia NTK for Parking longer than the permitted time
DIR By: DontStandForNonsense
Date: August 6, 2026, 1:59 am
---------------------------------------------------------
My partner received in the post yesterday a NTK (NTK_LINK
HTML https://photos.app.goo.gl/QaY5s1doG6d2o5Dk8)
for 'Parking longer
than the permitted time'
I'll be asking her shortly if she can recall any helpful
information from the driver, but on the face of it, does it look
like a notice she can avoid paying? The driver certainly would
have been a customer at one of the associated stores.
Thank you in advance.
#Post#: 126991--------------------------------------------------
Re: Britannia NTK for Parking longer than the permitted time
DIR By: jfollows
Date: August 6, 2026, 2:19 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The NTK is not atempting to use
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4
to
transfer liabiliity from the unknown driver to the registered
keeper, nor can it because it is issued too late to comply with
one of the legislation’s requirements (it needed to be issued by
9 July for this), so the registered keeper should appeal saying
that the driver will not be identified and that the registered
keeper is not liable because Britannia is unable to use PoFA
2012 to transfer liability.
If the appeal is rejected, after “careful consideration”,
meaning the big red “no” button, then a follow-up appeal to
POPLA will be required which will more likely be upheld.
See
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/overstay-parkingeye-private-parking-charge-notice-asda-ashford-kent/msg126985/#new<br
/>for example, which will require minor modification.
#Post#: 127040--------------------------------------------------
Re: Britannia NTK for Parking longer than the permitted time
DIR By: DontStandForNonsense
Date: August 6, 2026, 8:21 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: jfollows link ---
>
> The NTK is not atempting to use
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4
to
transfer liabiliity from the unknown driver to the registered
keeper, nor can it because it is issued too late to comply with
one of the legislation’s requirements (it needed to be issued by
9 July for this), so the registered keeper should appeal saying
that the driver will not be identified and that the registered
keeper is not liable because Britannia is unable to use PoFA
2012 to transfer liability.
>
> If the appeal is rejected, after “careful consideration”,
meaning the big red “no” button, then a follow-up appeal to
POPLA will be required which will more likely be upheld.
>
> See
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/overstay-parkingeye-private-parking-charge-notice-asda-ashford-kent/msg126985/#new<br
/>for example, which will require minor modification.
>
--- End Quote ---
Thanks for this.
What is considered the issue date?
Date of contravention:
Date of notice:
Date received in post:
And is there somewhere this rule is written that I can copy in?
#Post#: 127045--------------------------------------------------
Re: Britannia NTK for Parking longer than the permitted time
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: August 6, 2026, 8:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The 'Date of notice' can be assumed to be the date of issue.
--- Quote from: DontStandForNonsense link ---
>
> And is there somewhere this rule is written that I can copy
in?
>
--- End Quote ---
jfollows has provided a link to Schedule 4 of the Protection of
Freedoms Act 2012 in his previous reply.
#Post#: 127100--------------------------------------------------
Re: Britannia NTK for Parking longer than the permitted time
DIR By: DontStandForNonsense
Date: August 7, 2026, 1:21 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you,
I read the relevant paragraph and it states that they must serve
within 14 days. Here is the appeal:
Dear Sir or Madam,
I write as the registered keeper of the above vehicle to appeal
the Parking Charge Notice.
This Notice to Keeper does not comply with the mandatory
requirements of Paragraph 9 of Schedule 4 to the Protection of
Freedoms Act 2012. As a consequence, you are unable to transfer
liability for the alleged parking charge from the driver to the
registered keeper.
I am under no legal obligation to identify the driver and I
decline to do so.
In the circumstances, there is no lawful basis upon which to
pursue me as the registered keeper, and I require that this
Parking Charge Notice be cancelled.
Should you reject this appeal, please provide a full explanation
of the legal basis upon which you contend I am liable as the
registered keeper despite your failure to comply with the
requirements of Paragraph 9 of Schedule 4 to the Protection of
Freedoms Act 2012, together with the verification code required
to refer the matter to the appropriate independent appeals
service.
I look forward to your confirmation that this Parking Charge
Notice has been cancelled.
Yours faithfully,
#Post#: 127101--------------------------------------------------
Re: Britannia NTK for Parking longer than the permitted time
DIR By: RichardW
Date: August 7, 2026, 1:45 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Looks reasonable; although I would reference the specific
paragraph in POFA. This does assume that your Wife is the Reg
Keeper with V5C in her name, and it's not a lease car? The
notice would not be compliant for a lease either, but would need
a different appeal!
Odds on they will reject it anyway :o
#Post#: 127104--------------------------------------------------
Re: Britannia NTK for Parking longer than the permitted time
DIR By: DontStandForNonsense
Date: August 7, 2026, 2:15 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hiya,
Yes, she is the registered keeper. I suppose my thinking that
they should do their own research and that we shouldn't make it
easy for them (at this stage anyway)?
#Post#: 127105--------------------------------------------------
Re: Britannia NTK for Parking longer than the permitted time
DIR By: DontStandForNonsense
Date: August 7, 2026, 2:18 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: RichardW link ---
>
> Looks reasonable; although I would reference the specific
paragraph in POFA. This does assume that your Wife is the Reg
Keeper with V5C in her name, and it's not a lease car? The
notice would not be compliant for a lease either, but would need
a different appeal!
>
> Odds on they will reject it anyway :o
>
--- End Quote ---
The parking firm or POPLA will reject it?
#Post#: 127106--------------------------------------------------
Re: Britannia NTK for Parking longer than the permitted time
DIR By: InterCity125
Date: August 7, 2026, 3:03 am
---------------------------------------------------------
POPLA will almost certainly uphold the appeal due to the date
but you must go through the operator appeal process first.
You could simply add "- the notice was served beyond the 14 day
mandatory period" to your second sentence.
#Post#: 127113--------------------------------------------------
Re: Britannia NTK for Parking longer than the permitted time
DIR By: RichardW
Date: August 7, 2026, 4:18 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: DontStandForNonsense link ---
>
> Hiya,
>
> Yes, she is the registered keeper. I suppose my thinking that
they should do their own research and that we shouldn't make it
easy for them (at this stage anyway)?
>
--- End Quote ---
My thought here is that you might as well be as specific as
possible - if you say 'not compliant' they will just say 'yes it
is' - it's harder for them to say it is if you point out it's
out of time.
--- Quote from: DontStandForNonsense link ---
>
>
> The parking firm or POPLA will reject it?
>
--- End Quote ---
The parking co, for sure. POPLA maybe
--- Quote from: InterCity125 link ---
>
> POPLA will almost certainly uphold the appeal due to the date
but you must go through the operator appeal process first.
>
>
--- End Quote ---
There's nothing to stop the parking cos issuing an out of time
NTK saying the driver is liable, POFA just allows them to
transfer the liability to the keeper - and I have a hunch that
POPLA will just say it's OK - there doesn't appear to be any
wording in the notice about liability transfer, it just says
'the motorist' is liable (which is a deliberately vague term to
deflect from the fact that it is the unkown to them driver that
is liable).
As this is a Waitrose carpark have you tried there to get them
to cancel?
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page