DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 76525--------------------------------------------------
Parking Eye PCN – Overstayed by 17 mins – ASDA Bexleyheath
DIR By: fezster
Date: June 15, 2025, 3:27 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I have a leased vehicle for which the lease company has received
a parking charge from Parking Eye. The location - ASDA
Bexleyheath - allows 3 hours free parking, but the driver has
apparently overstayed by 17 minutes. Images attached.
The lease company have informed me that they have redirected
Parking Eye to issue the PCN to me (as the hirer of the
vehicle), but I have not yet received it.
I'd like to appeal the charge so looking for generic advice.
Specific questions I have from searching these forums:
1. The NtK apparently does not meet PoFA requirements. But can
this be used as a defence where the keeper is the lease company?
Your Notice to Keeper is not fully compliant with the
requirements of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012,
specifically Paragraph 9(2)(e)(i), as it fails to include the
mandatory invitation required by statute. Therefore, liability
cannot be transferred to the keeper.
2. The location shown is "ASDA Bexleyheath". A quick google
shows there are 2 locations that meet that description:
Asda Bexleyheath Superstore
Address: 140 Graham Rd, Broadway, Bexleyheath DA6 7BN
Asda Bexleyheath Crook Log Supermarket
Address: 13/15 Crook Log, Bexleyheath DA6 8EQ
Thank you.
Fezster.
HTML https://i.imgur.com/DJTdhuO.png
HTML https://i.imgur.com/tYKThae.png
#Post#: 76529--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye PCN – Overstayed by 17 mins – ASDA Bexleyheath
DIR By: jfollows
Date: June 15, 2025, 4:06 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Do not appeal the notice to keeper, which I assume is what you
have posted, you are not the keeper.
Wait for a notice to hirer to be sent to you, post it here, tell
us what other documents accompany it, probably none, and we can
advise on an appeal, which will be non-compliance with PoFA 2012
for a different reason.
Parking Eye, and most of their brethren, can’t be bothered with
PoFA 2012 for hired vehicles because they know the majority of
recipients to their non-compliant notices pay up anyway. They
even have the cheek to reject totally valid appeals, again
because they know more people pay up, but a POPLA appeal should
finally get this cancelled.
#Post#: 76542--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye PCN – Overstayed by 17 mins – ASDA Bexleyheath
DIR By: b789
Date: June 15, 2025, 5:26 am
---------------------------------------------------------
You will win this at POPLA once your initial appeal to the
Notice to Hirer (NtH) has been received and appealed. The
initial appeal will never succeed and ParkingEye will draw it
out by requesting the drivers details, which you must NEVER give
them.
You cannot respond to the Notice to Keeper (NtK) because you are
not the Registered Keeper. When you do receive the NtH in your
name, simply follow this advice:
There is no legal obligation on the known Hirer (the recipient
of the Notice to Hirer (NtH)) to reveal the identity of the
unknown driver and no inference or assumptions can be made.
The NtH 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 Hirer.
Use the following as your appeal. No need to embellish or remove
anything from it:
--- Quote ---
> I am the Hirer 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 Hirer (NtH) does not fully comply with ALL
the requirements of PoFA 2012, you are unable to hold the Hirer
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. ParkingEye has relied on contract law allegations
of breach against the driver only.
>
> The Hirer cannot be presumed or inferred to have been the
driver, nor pursued under some twisted interpretation of the law
of agency. Your NtH can only hold the driver liable. ParkingEye
have no hope at POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a
complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.
--- End Quote ---
When the appeal is eventually rejected, you will receive a POPLA
code and you can appeal with the two main points of appeal which
will be no Hirer liability because of failure to comply with
PoFA paras 9(2)(a) and 14(2).
#Post#: 76647--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye PCN – Overstayed by 17 mins – ASDA Bexleyheath
DIR By: fezster
Date: June 16, 2025, 4:50 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you. I am waiting for the NtH and will post that once it
arrives.
I've been trying to search all of your other posts to understand
which parts of PoFA 9(2)(a) and 14(2) their notice does not
comply with - would you mind telling me explicitly? Not that it
matters, as I know you know what you are talking about - but for
my own education please.
#Post#: 76648--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye PCN – Overstayed by 17 mins – ASDA Bexleyheath
DIR By: jfollows
Date: June 16, 2025, 5:03 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Sections 13 & 14 of
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4
Hire Vehicles
is what I’d be using
--- Quote ---
> 14(1)If—
>
> (a)the creditor is by virtue of paragraph 13(2) unable to
exercise the right to recover from the keeper any unpaid parking
charges mentioned in the notice to keeper, and
>
> (b)the conditions mentioned in sub-paragraph (2) below are
met,
>
> the creditor may recover those charges (so far as they remain
unpaid) from the hirer.
> (2)The conditions are that—
>
> (a)the creditor has within the relevant period given the hirer
a notice in accordance with sub-paragraph (5) (a “notice to
hirer”), together with a copy of the documents mentioned in
paragraph 13(2) and the notice to keeper;
>
> (b)a period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the
notice to hirer was given has elapsed; and
>
> (c)the vehicle was not a stolen vehicle at the beginning of
the period of parking to which the unpaid parking charges
relate.
>
> (3)In sub-paragraph (2)(a) “the relevant period” is the period
of 21 days beginning with the day after that on which the
documents required by paragraph 13(2) are given to the creditor.
--- End Quote ---
They won’t include the documents mentioned in paragraph 13(2),
they never do.
#Post#: 76654--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye PCN – Overstayed by 17 mins – ASDA Bexleyheath
DIR By: fezster
Date: June 16, 2025, 5:35 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Notice to Hirer attached:
HTML https://i.imgur.com/5gKsFxS.png
HTML https://i.imgur.com/RYS2yxS.png
#Post#: 76655--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye PCN – Overstayed by 17 mins – ASDA Bexleyheath
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: June 16, 2025, 5:36 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Were any other documents sent alongside this NtH? If not, the
appeal b789 suggested can now be submitted.
#Post#: 76656--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye PCN – Overstayed by 17 mins – ASDA Bexleyheath
DIR By: fezster
Date: June 16, 2025, 5:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
No other documents were supplied.
Thank you - I will submit b789's appeal.
#Post#: 78619--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye PCN – Overstayed by 17 mins – ASDA Bexleyheath
DIR By: fezster
Date: June 28, 2025, 4:06 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Response from ParkingEye to my appeal.
Interesting they refer to me as the "registered keeper", despite
sending me a NtH.
HTML https://i.imgur.com/CMTGfLo.png
I saw a similar response here:
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/milton-country-park-pcn/msg75542/#msg75542.<br
/>So have edited slightly and plan on going back with this -
does
this look ok?
--- Quote ---
>
> Dear ParkingEye,
>
> Re: Parking Charge Notice XXXXXX/YYYYYY
> Vehicle Registration: [Insert VRM]
> Date of Event: DD MMM YYYY
>
> I write in response to your latest letter, which is both
inaccurate and legally incoherent.
>
> You now cite Paragraphs 9(2)(b) and 9(2)(f) of Schedule 4 of
the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, which apply solely to
Notices to Keeper, not Notices to Hirer. This basic error alone
would be embarrassing enough, were it not compounded by your
persistent failure to grasp that:
>
> • You did not invoke Schedule 4 in your NtH;
> • You did not include copies of the documents required under
Paragraph 13(2), such as the hire agreement and statement of
liability;
>
> To recap: you have issued a legally defective notice, made a
baseless threat of keeper/hirer liability, misquoted
legislation, and are now doubling down on your mistake with a
recycled, irrelevant template letter that demonstrates either
ignorance of the law or wilful misrepresentation.
>
> You now have two options:
>
> 1. Cancel this charge immediately, recognising that pursuing
it any further is futile; or
> 2. Issue a POPLA code, where I will refer the assessor to your
PoFA failings and you can enjoy wasting the POPLA fee.
>
> I refer you, in spirit and with appropriate legal sarcasm, to
the response given in Arkell v Pressdram (1971). Should you fail
to cancel or issue a code, this matter will be escalated to the
DVLA, the ICO, and the BPA with a formal complaint regarding
misuse of data and breach of the KADOE contract.
>
> Yours faithfully,
>
> [Your Full Name]
> Hirer of the vehicle
>
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 78628--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye PCN – Overstayed by 17 mins – ASDA Bexleyheath
DIR By: jfollows
Date: June 28, 2025, 5:26 am
---------------------------------------------------------
You can reply or you can just ignore, this is just their last
ditch fishing attempt to get you to identify the driver.
Personally, I’d ignore, because all that’s going to happen is
that you’ll get a rejection and a POPLA code, which is what you
want and expect (apart from accepting your appeal, that is,
which never happens).
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 5
DIR Next Page