DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 50640--------------------------------------------------
Parking Charge Notice at Kelly's Storage (Luton Airport)
DIR By: UberDriver
Date: December 20, 2024, 5:53 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi there.
The registered keeper received this parking ticket because
allegedly stopped for a few minutes on private land, which is
owned by a company, called Kelly's Storage. It's near the Luton
Airport.
A few things to mention...
I'm not sure if it is still private land. The driver was
stopping very close to the public road and very far from Kelly's
gate.
The driver believes it was not more than 3 - 4 minutes.
They made only two pictures a few seconds between and did not
state how long The driver staying there.
There is only a small sign on the gate prohibiting parking
there.
This is a minicab that is allowed to stop even on a double-red
road.
They sent out this parking charge notice after 5 months.
This is their first letter for sure and the registered keeper's
address or the car is not changed for years back.
The pictures that they made of the car do not show the actual
gate so in my opinion is not proof that The driver actually
parked there.
I attached all the pictures and a Google Street view that I have
made.
My question is: Can I appeal on the basis that The driver just
read the terms and conditions and left shortly after?
And I found it strange, say you going to visit a company and you
find them shut but they send you a parking fine later on because
you were trying to find out about opening times while reading
the signs on the gate.
What is your opinion? Any help and suggestions are really
appreciated.
Merry Christmas for everyone.
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 50644--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Charge Notice at Kelly's Storage (Luton Airport)
DIR By: b789
Date: December 20, 2024, 6:45 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hilarious. Easy one to defeat... as long as the unknown drivers
identity is not revealed. There is no legal obligation on the
known keeper (the recipient of the Notice to Keeper (NtK)) to
reveal the identity of the unknown driver and no inference or
assumptions can be made.
The NtK is not compliant with all the requirements of PoFA which
means that if the unknown driver is not identified, they cannot
transfer liability for the charge from the unknown driver to the
known keeper.
Use the following as your appeal. No need to embellish or remove
anything from it:
--- Quote ---
> I am the keeper of the vehicle and I dispute your 'parking
charge'. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I
will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your
client landowner.
>
> As your Notice to Keeper (NtK) does not fully comply with ALL
the requirements of PoFA 2012, you are unable to hold the keeper
of the vehicle liable for the charge. Partial or even
substantial compliance is not sufficient. There will be no
admission as to who was driving and no inference or assumptions
can be drawn. UPE has relied on contract law allegations of
breach against the driver only.
>
> The registered keeper cannot be presumed or inferred to have
been the driver, nor pursued under some twisted interpretation
of the law of agency. Your NtK can only hold the driver liable.
UPE have no hope at IAS, so you are urged to save us both a
complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.
--- End Quote ---
If it were me appealing, I would add the following:
--- Quote ---
> If you are unsure about the legal aspects of my appeal, I
suggest you pass it to your legal advisers and mention that I
refer them to the response given in Arkell v Pressdram (1971).
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 54496--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Charge Notice at Kelly's Storage (Luton Airport)
DIR By: pipo6066
Date: January 22, 2025, 7:28 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi there,
I received one too, just wondering how the Original posters
story ended? An updated would be appreciated, thanks
#Post#: 63485--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Charge Notice at Kelly's Storage (Luton Airport)
DIR By: UberDriver
Date: March 20, 2025, 11:38 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The Park Dubbo alias Universal Parking Enforcement Ltd has
rejected my appeal.
I have copied the letter below. I overwrite the sensitive part
with X.
Any advice?
"Dear XX XXXX XXXXXX,
Re: Parking Charge Notice Number xxxxxxxxxxx (Vehicle XXXXXXX)
Site: Preservation House, Airport Way, LU29LF
Issue Date: XX/06/2024
Contravention: Parked on or within a no parking area
Further to your letter of appeal received on XX/12/2024
regarding the above parking charge.
We note your comments, however, when this Parking Charge Notice
(PCN) was issued this vehicle was in contravention of the
agreed terms and conditions for all users of this site.
Your appeal has been reviewed and the Patrol Officers
photographs and bodycam footage have all been taken into account
(where necessary).
On XX/06/2024 the vehicle was witnessed parked at Preservation
House, Airport Way, LU29LF. This is private land and is subject
to a parking management scheme which has been put in place by
the operator at the landowner’s request. Signs are installed in
clear and prominent positions around the land.
I have read and considered all the points in your appeal and
below are my findings and decision following the evidence
provided.
The vehicle was parked on the land which is private land where
parking is not allowed at any time. Signs are located around the
area, and it is the responsibility of the driver, to survey the
area ensuring they are not parked on private property and in
contravention of any parking terms and conditions. There are
also 2 large billboard signs on either side of the entrance
stating “no
parking 24 hour access required” as well as smaller signs
covering the whole area stating “Private Land, no parking
allowed at any
time.”
This area is not permitted for drop-offs, pick-ups,
loading/unloading and is also not a temporary stopping/parking
area. The area is
also marked with both double yellow and red lines indicating a
no stopping and no parking zones. This includes drivers that are
blue badge holders.
The parking charge was issued as the vehicle was captured parked
on private land and in breach of the parking terms and
conditions. The photographic images are evidence of the vehicle
being parked on the land which is sufficient to validate this
parking charge.
While I sympathise and appreciate this may not be the outcome
you were expecting, you have now reached the end of the internal
appeal process.
It is the responsibility of the driver and not a third party to
seek, read, and comply with the terms and conditions of parking
that are
in place. By parking on the property in breach of these terms
and conditions, you agree that the charge detailed on the signs
will
be paid.
We are therefore unable to cancel the PCN as it was issued
correctly and you are required to make a payment of £100.00 if
paid
by XX/04/2025 after which date your case may attract additional
charges and be passed to a Debt Recovery Company to start
debt recovery proceedings, such cases may be subject to any
other additional costs incurred in obtaining settlement, so in
order
to avoid debt recovery proceedings and incurring additional
costs please pay by the due date.
Payments can be made online by Debit or Credit Card at
www.parkdubbo.com via 'View Your PCN' then 'Make a Payment' or
by
bank transfer by using your PCN number as the Reference to Bank
Name: Metro Bank, Account Name: Universal Parking
Enforcement Ltd, Sord Code:23-05-80, Account Number: 44992515,
by post with cheque or postal order made payable to
Universal Parking Enforcement Ltd, 960 Capability Green, Luton,
England, LU13PE. If you are experiencing difficulty making
payment please email mail@universalparking.co.uk with your
details and a member of the team will respond to you.
You have now reached the end of our internal appeals procedure.
If you still feel there is a legal or technical reason that we
have
not dealt with, and not a mitigating circumstance, there is an
Independent Appeals Service (IAS) to which you are entitled to
appeal
but please be aware that if your independent appeal is
unsuccessful the reduced rate of £60 will no longer be
applicable to you and
you will be required to pay the full £100 within 14 days of the
IAS decision to avoid further costs being added. The IAS will
not
consider any appeals if the payment is made. In order to appeal,
you will need your PCN number, your vehicle registration and the
date the charge was originally issued. Appeals must be submitted
to the IAS within 21 days of the date of this letter. The IAS
provides an Alternative Dispute Resolution scheme for disputes
of this type. As you have complied with our internal appeals
procedure you may use, and we will engage with, the IAS Standard
Appeals Service providing you lodge an appeal within 21 days
of this rejection letter. Please visit the Independent Appeals
Service (theias.org) for full details.
Yours sincerely,
Appeals Team"
#Post#: 63488--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Charge Notice at Kelly's Storage (Luton Airport)
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: March 20, 2025, 11:59 am
---------------------------------------------------------
What date did you receive this rejection, today?
I will include below an adapted version of a suggested IAS
appeal, taken from another ongoing case at this exact location,
taken from this thread: Universal Parking Enforcement, PCN,
Parking on a no Parking Area, Kellys Storage LU2 9LF
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/universal-parking-enforcement-pcn-parking-on-a-no-parking-area-kellys-storage-lu/msg63296/#msg63296
Be under no illusions that the IAS are not fit for purpose, and
there's a strong chance they will reject your appeal. However,
it costs nothing to try, and the result is not binding on you. I
usually don't recomend bothering with the IAS, but of the very
small number of successful IAS appeals I have seen, they've
nearly all been cases like this where the notice was issued far
too late.
Again, you are appealing as the registered keeper.
--- Quote ---
>
> [center][NAME] (Registered Keeper) (Appellant)[/center]
> [center]-Vs-[/center]
> [center]Universal Parking Enforcement (Operator)[/center]
> Vehicle Registration Mark:[VRM]
> Parking Charge Notice Number: [PCN REFERENCE]
>
> Case Overview:
> I, the registered keeper (“I”/“the Appellant”) of the above
vehicle (VRM: _______), received a parking charge notice via
post from Universal Parking Enforcement (“the Operator”), which
purported to be a Notice to Keeper. I appealed to the Operator,
who acknowledged and subsequently rejected my appeal. It is my
position that as the registered keeper of the vehicle I have no
liability for the parking charge, and that my appeal should
therefore be upheld. My appeal is on the following grounds:
>
> 1. No keeper liability: the Parking Charge Notice does not
comply with the requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of
Freedoms Act (“PoFA”/“the Act”):
> The operator does not not know the identity of the driver and
is therefore seeking to recover the charge from me, the
registered keeper of the vehicle. As established in the
persuasive appeal case of VCS v Edward (2023) [HOKF6C9C], the
Operator may not draw an inference as to who was driving on the
basis of who the registered keeper is. They are therefore
pursuing me as the registered keeper, and the IAS should
therefore consider my lack of liability for the charge as the
keeper of the vehicle.
>
> In order to be able to recover any unpaid charges from me as
the registered keeper, the operator must comply with the
requirements outlined in Schedule 4 of the Protection of
Freedoms Act 2012. They have failed to do so. They have failed
to deliver the notice within the relevant period of 14 days
beginning with the day after that on which the specified period
of parking ended, as specified by 9(5) of the Act.
>
> Date of Parking: 27/06/2024
> Date of PCN issue: 27/11/2024
> Date of presumed service (2 working days after issue, as per
9(6) of the Act): 29/11/2024
> Elapsed time period: 155 days
>
> The notice was sent and delivered more than 5 months after the
date of the alleged parking event. As Universal Parking
Enforcement have clearly not complied with the conditions of
PoFA, and as there is no evidence as to who was driving, I
cannot be held liable for the charge as the registered keeper,
and my appeal should be upheld.
--- End Quote ---
[/quote]
#Post#: 63489--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Charge Notice at Kelly's Storage (Luton Airport)
DIR By: b789
Date: March 20, 2025, 12:01 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Not to worry. They can never enforce the charge against the
Keeper and they have no idea who the driver is.
Did you add this bit to the appeal as I suggested:
--- Quote ---
> If you are unsure about the legal aspects of my appeal, I
suggest you pass it to your legal advisers and mention that I
refer them to the response given in Arkell v Pressdram (1971).
--- End Quote ---
If not, I suggest you send them a response to their appeal
rejection with the above quote.
Personally, I would not bother with an IAS appeal. They are
useless and a waste of time. When you receive any debt recovery
letters, you can safely ignore them. The debt collectors are
powerless to actually do anything except to try and scare the
low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree into paying out of
ignorance and fear. Never, ever communicate with a powerless
debt collector.
They may eventually send you a Letter of Claim (LoC) but that is
just more of the scare tactics. Show us if you ever receive an
LoC. Should they actually issue an N1SDT Claim Form, then that
will need responding to but there is no way that thei will ever
reach a hearing and the most likely outcome, if they are stupid
enough to try and push it that far (unlikely), is that they
would discontinue or the claim would be struck out.
There simply is no way they can hold the Keeper liable and the
Keeper is under no legal obligation to identify the driver.
There is no win for them.
#Post#: 63503--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Charge Notice at Kelly's Storage (Luton Airport)
DIR By: UberDriver
Date: March 20, 2025, 12:56 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Yes, it was today. I will try this IAS appeal as a registered
keeper for fun, and (if applicable) I will ignore the debt
recoveries as well, and I will post an update.
Thanks to all of you.
#Post#: 67644--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Charge Notice at Kelly's Storage (Luton Airport)
DIR By: UberDriver
Date: April 18, 2025, 9:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Little WIN TODAY!!!
I tried to appeal the PCN on the IAS website, but the website
did not recognise the PCN and/or my number plate, so I contacted
Universal Parking about this issue. One week later, they
answered, and another week later, the issue was fixed, and then
the IAS recognized the PCN and number plate.
Then I used the "IAS appeal template" which is above, and 10
days later, I got the email that:
"Dear XXXXX,
Thank you for your appeal. Due to further information, Universal
Parking Enforcement has confirmed they will no longer be
pursuing the matter, and the parking charge has been cancelled."
So it was a success.
My question is now: Is it not possible to report this group
(Park Dubbo, Universal Parking, and TNC collections) to the
Police for scamming people, deceitful blackmailing, or
committing a criminal act as a group?
They obviously don't follow the rules as they should. I'm
guessing if they're pursuing money from people, they have to
pass the PCN details to the IAS, which is probably not
happening, I think, but they're still sending emails and letters
with harsh notes to people.
By the way, I mentioned the TNC collections because while I was
doing email conversations with Universal Parking, once a TNC
executive answered my email. So they are one scamming group.
Anyway, thanks to all for your help.
Have a nice day. :)
#Post#: 67647--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Charge Notice at Kelly's Storage (Luton Airport)
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: April 18, 2025, 9:59 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Good result, well done.
The fact that you as the keeper didn't owe them any money does
not mean that they have committed a criminal offence.
#Post#: 67652--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Charge Notice at Kelly's Storage (Luton Airport)
DIR By: b789
Date: April 18, 2025, 11:15 am
---------------------------------------------------------
You do have grounds to report Universal to the DVLA based on the
misuse of DVLA keeper data, which is a serious matter.
Grounds for complaint are:
[indent]• The Notice to Keeper was issued five months after the
alleged contravention.
• This is well outside the time limits set under Schedule 4 of
the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) to lawfully pursue
the Keeper for payment.
• The operator explicitly relied on PoFA in their NtK, implying
they could hold the Keeper liable.
• The IAS appeal was withdrawn after the Keeper raised the lack
of PoFA compliance—confirming that the operator had no legal
basis to pursue the Keeper.[/indent]
Therefore, the operator appears to have accessed and used DVLA
data under false pretences, i.e., on the basis that they had a
lawful reason to pursue the Keeper when they did not. Here’s how
to make a DVLA complaint:
[indent]• Go to:
HTML https://contact.dvla.gov.uk/complaints
• Select: “Making a complaint or compliment about the Vehicles
service you have received”
• Enter your personal details, contact details, and vehicle
details
• Use the text box to summarise your complaint or insert a
covering note
• You will then be able to upload a file (up to 19.5 MB) — this
can be your full complaint or supporting evidence
That’s it.[/indent]
The DVLA is required to record, investigate and respond to every
complaint about a private parking company. If everyone who
encounters a breach took the time to submit a complaint, we
might finally see the DVLA take meaningful action—whether that
means curtailing or removing KADOE access altogether.
For the text part of the complaint the webform could use the
following:
--- Quote ---
> I am submitting a formal complaint against Universal Parking
Enforcement Ltd, an IPC AOS member with DVLA KADOE access, for
breaching the Private Parking Single Code of Practice (PPSCoP)
after obtaining my personal data.
>
> While the Operator may have had reasonable cause at the time
of their KADOE request, their subsequent misuse of my
data—through conduct that contravenes the PPSCoP—renders that
use unlawful. The PPSCoP forms an integral part of the DVLA’s
governance framework for data access by private parking firms.
Continued access is conditional on compliance.
>
> The DVLA, as data controller, is obliged under UK GDPR and the
Data Protection Act 2018 to investigate and take enforcement
action when data is misused following release. This complaint is
not about whether the data was obtained lawfully at the outset,
but whether its subsequent use breached the terms under which it
was provided.
>
> I have prepared a supporting statement setting out the nature
of the breach and the Operator’s actions, and I request a full
investigation into this matter. I have attached the supporting
document.
>
> Please acknowledge receipt and confirm the reference number
for this complaint.
--- End Quote ---
Then you could upload the following as a PDF file for the formal
complaint itself:
--- Quote ---
> SUPPORTING STATEMENT
>
> Complaint to DVLA – Breach of KADOE Contract and PPSCoP
>
> Operator name: Universal Parking Enforcement Ltd
> Date of PCN issue: 27 November 2024
> Vehicle registration: [INSERT VRM]
>
> I am submitting this complaint to report a misuse of my
personal data by [INSERT PPC NAME], who obtained my keeper
details from the DVLA under the KADOE (Keeper At Date Of Event)
contract.
>
> Although the parking company may have had reasonable cause to
request my data initially, the way they have used that data
afterwards amounts to unlawful processing. This is because they
have acted in breach of the BPA/IPC Private Parking Single Code
of Practice (PPSCoP), which is a mandatory requirement for
access to DVLA keeper data. The PPSCoP forms part of the
framework that regulates how parking companies must behave once
they have received keeper data from the DVLA.
>
> The KADOE contract makes clear that keeper data may only be
used to pursue an unpaid parking charge in line with the Code of
Practice. If a parking company fails to comply with the PPSCoP
after receiving DVLA data, their use of that data becomes
unlawful, as they are no longer using it for a permitted
purpose.
>
> InIn this case, Universal Parking Enforcement Ltd has breached
the PPSCoP in the following way:
>
> – They issued a Notice to Keeper dated 27 November 2024 for an
alleged contravention on 27 June 2024, i.e. over five months
after the event.
> – Despite this delay, the NtK purports to hold the registered
keeper liable, using language that closely mirrors the
requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act
2012 (PoFA).
> – The NtK fails to clarify that PoFA does not apply, and
instead implies that the Keeper will be held liable if driver
details are not supplied.
> – The operator subsequently pursued the registered keeper as
liable under PoFA until the IAS appeal highlighted the lack of
compliance, at which point they withdrew their case entirely.
>
> These are not minor or technical breaches. They show a clear
disregard for the standards required under the current single
Code. As a result, the operator is no longer entitled to use the
keeper data they obtained from the DVLA, because the purpose for
which it was provided (a fair and lawful pursuit of a charge
under the Code) no longer applies.
>
> The DVLA remains the Data Controller for the data it releases
under KADOE, and is therefore responsible for ensuring that
personal data is not misused by third parties. This includes
taking action against AOS operators who breach the conditions
under which the data was provided. I am therefore asking the
DVLA to investigate this breach and to take appropriate action
under the terms of the KADOE contract.
>
> This may include:
>
> [indent]• Confirming that a breach has occurred
> • Taking enforcement action against the operator
> •Suspending or terminating their KADOE access if
warranted[/indent]
>
> I have attached relevant supporting material with this
statement. Please confirm receipt and provide a reference for
this complaint. I am also happy to provide further information
if required.
>
> Name: [INSERT YOUR NAME]
> Date: [INSERT DATE]
--- End Quote ---
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1