DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 92177--------------------------------------------------
Re: Private Parking Ticket - wasn't aware on private land
DIR By: sooty12113
Date: September 30, 2025, 8:32 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I've now had a response from UKPS who have uploaded documents to
the adjudicators portal, how should I proceed on here ?
They've provided a site map and PDF's of what they say are the
signs but not the other requested material
#Post#: 92185--------------------------------------------------
Re: Private Parking Ticket - wasn't aware on private land
DIR By: jfollows
Date: September 30, 2025, 8:44 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Something like Google Drive to which you can upload documents
and provide us a link.
#Post#: 92192--------------------------------------------------
Re: Private Parking Ticket - wasn't aware on private land
DIR By: sooty12113
Date: September 30, 2025, 9:32 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks firstly I've provided a new link for the example parking
evidence and the notice I received given Imgur is no longer
available from today.
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_9BQJCt2UL3Umk1kwa513zLrs1XT97mD/view?usp=sharing
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1aAey9EPcRZp-Q3GD8mq3yo-HJ8hPzRJp/view?usp=sharing
and on the link below the new material which is the site map
showing the sign locations on the site and the apparent signs.
None of these were noticed on the day by the driver.
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/187We7a_y2zq6XIYmSHW_jhjntwUH-E1a/view?usp=sharing
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1kEwewIQlio4D5B-QTmcaHpy7jU1H3DCb/view?usp=sharing
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1K9z1Z0mXb0XSHc6T5msPybJoqqrJ38y8/view?usp=sharing
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1kAn735CtuBaAxsU4EOiYl3mVke2EjLLD/view?usp=sharing
The additional information I was advised to request, land owner
permissions etc has not been provided
#Post#: 92203--------------------------------------------------
Re: Private Parking Ticket - wasn't aware on private land
DIR By: b789
Date: September 30, 2025, 11:07 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Can you point out on that plan where those two images of your
vehicle are. I cannot see anything that resembles the location
and you need to then check their plan with the location of
actual signs.
This is a response you can give to their prima facie evidence:
--- Quote ---
> Rebuttal to operator’s prima facie case
>
> 1. The operator’s evidence does not address or rebut core
points raised in my appeal and fails to establish keeper
liability or a contravention.
>
> 2. PoFA Schedule 4 para 9(2)(a): no period of parking. The NtK
states only “the period of time immediately preceding 14/09/2025
at 13:54”, which is a single timestamp padded with vague
wording, not a period of parking. This point was raised and
remains unanswered. Persuasive appellate case law in Brennan v
PPS (2023) confirmed that without a definitive period of
parking, the NtK is not PoFA 2012 compliant and the Keeper
cannot be liable.
>
> 2. PoFA Schedule 4 para 9(2)(a): relevant land not identified.
The location is given only as “Nova”, with no address or
postcode. This is inherently ambiguous and does not identify
relevant land. The operator has not remedied or rebutted this.
>
> 3. PoFA Schedule 4 paras 9(2)(e)(i) and 9(2)(f): defective
invitation and warning. The NtK does not contain the mandatory
invitation to the keeper to pay or name the driver, nor the
prescribed warning that the keeper will be liable after 28 days
if the charge remains unpaid and the driver is not named. The
generic wording relied upon does not mirror the statute. This
remains unrebutted.
>
> 4. Timing and posting proof: although the NtK shows an issue
date, no proof of date of posting has been provided as required
by the PPSCoP 8.1.2(d) Note 2. The appeal requested this; the
operator has not provided it. Presumption of delivery within the
relevant period is rebutted.
>
> 5. Landowner authority: no contemporaneous, signed, contract
meeting PPSCoP section 14.1(a)–(j) has been produced. There is
no proof of authority to manage the site, issue PCNs, or pursue
charges in their own name, nor any boundary plan or applicable
byelaws. This was expressly requested and not supplied.
>
> 6. Signage: the operator has filed a site plan and facsimile
artwork but no dated, in-situ photographs demonstrating actual
placement, prominence, legibility, core term prominence
(including the parking charge), or that the signs were in place
on the material date. Nothing ties the car images to any
particular sign or to the positions on the plan. The signage
objections therefore stand.
>
> 7. Contravention and duration: the evidence shows at most a
moment in time. There is no proof of a parking period or that
any minimum consideration period was exceeded. Without evidence
of a period of parking greater than the minimum consideration
period, no contract could be formed. This was raised and remains
unanswered.
>
> 8. Site identification gap: the photographs do not contain
unique, verifiable features that match the plan, and no camera
locations or “no parking area” markings are evidenced. It is
impossible to verify that the vehicle was at the site described.
>
> Conclusion: The NtK is not PoFA-compliant on multiple
independent grounds and keeper liability cannot arise. The
driver remains unidentified and there can be no presumption or
inference that the Keeper must be the driver as confirmed in the
persuasive appellate case of VCS v Edward (2023). The operator
has failed to evidence landowner authority, adequate signage,
site identification, posting, or an actual parking period. Their
prima facie case fails and the appeal should be allowed.
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 92273--------------------------------------------------
Re: Private Parking Ticket - wasn't aware on private land
DIR By: sooty12113
Date: October 1, 2025, 2:45 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for the very helpful reply, my vehicle was parked just
around the corner of the site plan (bottom left) just past the
building with the flat roof.
I can see from the photographs on the day that two signs are on
the right hand side from the camera angle across the street
where the vehicle was parked, these weren't noticed on the day.
It can't be seen from the photographs which sign from those
provided it was.
The driver thought he was parked on a public road as other
vehicles were parked in the vicinity, there were no road
markings and he didn't spot the signs hence why he parked.
There is proof of parking in respect of photographs of the
driver parking at 11:17 and returning at 13:53 so I don't think
I should include point 7, but would appreciate your opinion
before I reply.
#Post#: 92335--------------------------------------------------
Re: Private Parking Ticket - wasn't aware on private land
DIR By: b789
Date: October 1, 2025, 8:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Where is the signage that informs the driver they are entering
private land as they turn right on Holdford Road?
This wouldn't stand a chance if it were ever to go to a county
court hearing. As this is just the kangaroo court that is the
IAS, don't worry about it.
Does the timestamp on the first photo on the NtK match the
timestamp at the bottom of it?
#Post#: 92345--------------------------------------------------
Re: Private Parking Ticket - wasn't aware on private land
DIR By: sooty12113
Date: October 1, 2025, 8:53 am
---------------------------------------------------------
There doesn't appear to be a sign as you turn around the corner
on Holdford Road, if there is one further down the road before
the right turn it's not showing on the site plan.
Yes the timestamps match
#Post#: 92354--------------------------------------------------
Re: Private Parking Ticket - wasn't aware on private land
DIR By: sooty12113
Date: October 1, 2025, 9:19 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I've also just noticed the following wording by the operator on
the adjudicator portal
The operator made their Prima Facie Case on 30/09/2025 13:09:36.
The operator reported that...
ANPR/CCTV was used.
The Notice to Keeper was sent on 18/09/2025.
A response was received from the Notice to Keeper.
The ticket was issued on 14/09/2025.
The Notice to Keeper (ANPR) was sent in accordance with PoFA.
The charge is based in Contract.
The operator made the following comments...
There are clear signs on this route that this area is a no
parking area which can be seen in the photographic evidence
circled in red. This is at the landowners request as the area is
an access route.
As you can see the vehicle remained parked on this route. It is
the drivers sole responsibility to ensure they are adhering to
these terms and conditions.
This parking charge has been issued in line with PoFa 2012 and
so UKPS will continue to hold the registered keeper liable.
As a result this parking charge was issued correctly.
#Post#: 92416--------------------------------------------------
Re: Private Parking Ticket - wasn't aware on private land
DIR By: b789
Date: October 1, 2025, 1:42 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
THere's not much you can do about it now. You have rebutted the
operators prima facie case and it is down to the kangaroo court
to reject it, irrespective of any evidence to the contrary.
The IAS decision is not binding on you and you do not have to
pay anything. They will eventually try and litigate the matter
and as long as you follow the advice given here, you won't be
paying a penny to this scamming firm.
#Post#: 92461--------------------------------------------------
Re: Private Parking Ticket - wasn't aware on private land
DIR By: sooty12113
Date: October 1, 2025, 11:21 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks, I'm attempting to paste the points you raise on my final
response to the Operator but the IAS portal on this section
doesn't appear to allow the pasting of text. Is this correct ?
To get around this to save me the time of re-typing everything,
I was going to attach my response as a word document, informing
the IAS in the response box why I have done this, would this be
in order ?
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 3
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page