DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 100787--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC: Parked in a permit area without displaying a permit
By: Plywood-Enthusiast Date: December 2, 2025, 6:07 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I was going to write and submit an appeal on the last day on
behalf of the keepr.
I tried to post on 2/12/2025, which would have been the the 28th
day since the wrote the parking charge.
The infraction was 28/10/25, the first charge letter was dated
5/11/25 and a remind letter was 19/11/25 it was 2/12/25 when a
appeal was attempted however the page says it is no longer
eligble for appeal. Isn't there 28 days from the date the ticket
was issued to appeal?
I wrote and sent a letter out to UKPC with the written appeal.
I have kept screenshots of the appeals page and payment page
with the date and time in the frame.
The appeals page says appeals are closed it is now been sent to
debt collection with fees, the payment page still has the £100
payment option.
#Post#: 100827--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC: Parked in a permit area without displaying a permit
By: b789 Date: December 3, 2025, 6:16 am
---------------------------------------------------------
You are getting hung up on the wrong “28 days”. The Code does
not give them 28 days from the date printed on the notice to
shut the door on appeals. The PPSCoP talks about 28 days from
when the keeper "receives" the notice, and then explains how
“receipt” is worked out for something sent by post.
In your case the timeline is quite straightforward. The alleged
contravention was on 28/10/2025. The Notice to Keeper (NtK) is
dated 05/11/2025. The PPSCoP says that a notice sent by post is
presumed delivered on the second working day after the date of
posting, unless you can prove otherwise. If UKPC actually posted
it on 05/11, the first working day is Thursday 06/11 and the
second working day is Friday 07/11. So, for the purposes of the
PPSCoP, the NtK is treated as received on 07/11/2025.
The 28-day appeal window in the PPSCoP then runs from that date
of deemed receipt, not from the 5th. Count 28 days from
07/11/2025 and you land on 05/12/2025. That is the last day on
which the Keeper must be allowed to lodge an appeal under the
Code. You tried to use the online appeals portal on 02/12/2025,
which is only day 25 from deemed receipt. In other words, your
appeal attempt was comfortably within the 28-day period the
PPSCoP requires.
Now put that alongside what the Code actually says. Section
8.1.2(e) requires that the notice itself tells the recipient
they can appeal if they do so within 28 days of receiving the
parking charge. The Note under that sub-paragraph is the bit
that sets out the “second working day” presumption I have
quoted. Section 8.4.1 then says that operators must provide a
process which allows the parking charge to be appealed within 28
days, and at §8.4.1(c) it goes further and says they must
consider late appeals where the motorist can show exceptional
circumstances.
UKPC’s system blocking an appeal on 02/12/2025, and declaring
that the case had been sent to debt recovery even though the 28
days from receipt had not yet expired, is flatly contrary to
both 8.1.2(e) and 8.4.1(a). Even if they wanted to argue about
when you actually got the NtK, your screenshots show that,
taking their own issue date at face value and applying the
Code’s deemed delivery rule, you were still well within time
when you tried to appeal.
That deemed-delivery rule also contains the escape clause I
pointed out: the presumption applies “unless the contrary is
proved”. UKPC will be put to strict proof of the date the notice
actually entered the postal system using a genuine first-class
(1–2 day) service. They will not be able to do so. They
invariably rely on hybrid-mail systems offering 2–3 day delivery
with no individual proof of posting and no evidence of the exact
day the NtK entered Royal Mail’s network. That is not proof of
first-class posting, and it does not satisfy the evidential
requirement of the Note in the PPSCoP. As soon as UKPC attempt
to rely on the presumption, it is rebutted. In other words, your
appeal window is not only intact on the deemed-delivery
calculation, it is even stronger once the presumption is knocked
out.
You captured screenshots of the online appeal page and payment
page, showing the date and time when their system wrongly stated
that appeals were closed and the matter was with a debt
collector, while still happily offering you a £100 payment
button. You have also sent a written appeal to UKPC in the
keeper’s name, which does not identify the driver.
The narrative for the formal complaint and appeal is therefore
simple: contravention on 28/10, NtK dated 05/11, deemed receipt
on 07/11 under the PPSCoP, and an online appeal attempt on 02/12
which was within the 28-day period. The refusal to accept that
appeal is a breach of 8.1.2(e) and 8.4.1(a). The previous
written appeal must therefore be treated as an in-time appeal
and processed accordingly, with either cancellation or a
rejection including a POPLA code.
Section 11.2 of the PPSCoP then bites. That clause says that
where a parking operator receives a complaint that it considers
to be or include an appeal against the validity of a parking
charge, it must treat it as an appeal for the purposes of the
8.4 timescales unless and until it is clear that the complaint
is not relevant to an appeal. The complaint is plainly about the
validity of the charge and the handling of the appeal window, so
UKPC are required to treat it as an appeal under the Code.
The escalation narrative is then completed by noting that
continuing to block an in-time appeal and pushing the consumer
towards “debt collection” while misrepresenting their appeal
rights is not only a PPSCoP breach but also an unfair commercial
practice under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers
Act 2024. This behaviour involves misleading actions and
omissions concerning the consumer’s rights of redress, and the
use of aggressive commercial pressure. It is conduct that may
fall within the CMA’s enforcement remit under the DMCC. If the
person reading the complaint does not understand the
implications of that, they should pass it immediately to a
responsible adult within UKPC who has the intellectual capacity
to do so.
Finally, the keeper makes clear that if UKPC refuse to recognise
the appeal as in-time or fail to issue a proper rejection with a
POPLA code, the matter will be escalated to the BPA, the DVLA,
and the CMA for breaches of the PPSCoP, misuse of DVLA data, and
unfair commercial practices under the DMCC.
#Post#: 100855--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC: Parked in a permit area without displaying a permit
By: Plywood-Enthusiast Date: December 3, 2025, 7:46 am
---------------------------------------------------------
thanks b789 Thats reassuring.
I did the appeal late on 2/12/25 and then only realised I should
be screenshotting the pages just shortly after midnight and was
dreading that I would be clutching at straws with that
screenshot because the date on there clearly shows it just after
"28 days". But the two extra days for postage comes in handy.
Here are the screenshots to put it on public record. I have sent
an email to their complaints, with the aim of escalating to BPA
and CMA. I will send this evidence to CMA anyway because other
people are getting screwed. In the complaint email I have sent
90% of your post above^ (changed from 'you' to 'i' and proof
read it so it makes sense, and removed advice directed to me)
I have uploaded the images below as matter of public record.
[img width=1100
height=618]
HTML https://forumshares.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/blockedappeal.jpg[/img]
[img width=1100
height=618]
HTML https://forumshares.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/paymentopen.jpg[/img]
#Post#: 104944--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC: Parked in a permit area without displaying a permit
By: Plywood-Enthusiast Date: January 7, 2026, 7:48 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hello
I would like some assistance on how to draft the appeal. And
clarification on deadline of appeal. THe NOR (notice of
rejection) was issued on 11-dec. Today is day 28 according to
UKPC. Not sure if POPLA will extend this for a few more days or
not. WOuld like help to submit the POPLA appeal.
I am very busy today, would rather do this another day. Can I
make a draft appeal with just the default POFA non-compliant
line and add the other 3 reasons later?
TIA
RK sent a letter to complaints address at ukpc. Putting in
appeal based on non-compliant POFA letter. Also complaining
about the early withdrawal of appeals.
UKPC sent a letter to RK on 11-Dec rejecting the appeal and a
POPLA code was provided.
There are 3 corrospondonce since OP.
If you count 11-Dec as day 1. Today 7th Jan would be day 28 So I
am in a rush to submit the appeal. I know there are a few more
days buffer. But I am going to rush through and send this.
My defence:
1) non pofa compliant letter to RK
2) procedural impropriety - blocking the appeal within the 28
day period.
3) loading activity performed for a tower block, land has path
to this land, and the tower blocks store their refuse bins on
this car park. So driver deduces the car park land belongs to
the building.
4) Lack of signage as per below. Driver did not drive by or walk
by any signs about parking restrictions, the land looks derelict
with no bay markings. You have to walk to the far corner to read
parking sign. The driver stopped near where the toyota ch-r is
on that picture. And walked towards the Stratosphere tower to
make delivery. There is no obvious indication this land is
restricted parking. Driver did not receive a windscreen permit.
So did not realise they needed to photagrap their delivery
iteniery. So this was last due to lack of windscreen permit.
UKPC used a warden to manually take photos (which shows less
than 1 minute observation). They did not issue ticket via CCTV.
In which case driver could have proven they were loading from
the CCTV footage.
[img width=1100
height=825]
HTML https://forumshares.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/ukpc/nosign.jpg[/img]
[img width=1100
height=825]
HTML https://forumshares.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/ukpc/nosign2.jpg[/img]
The corrospendce receive by RK.
[img width=1100
height=1507]
HTML https://forumshares.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/ukpc/ukpc_0001.jpg[/img]
[img width=1100
height=1507]
HTML https://forumshares.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/ukpc/ukpc_0002.jpg[/img]
[img width=1100
height=1507]
HTML https://forumshares.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/ukpc/ukpc_0003.jpg[/img]
[img width=1100
height=1507]
HTML https://forumshares.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/ukpc/ukpc_0004.jpg[/img]
[img width=1100
height=1507]
HTML https://forumshares.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/ukpc/ukpc_0005.jpg[/img]
[img width=1100
height=1528]
HTML https://forumshares.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/ukpc/ukpc_0006.jpg[/img]
After the letter on 11th December, they have also sent this
email reply for some reason:
January 2nd to RK
[quote]Good morning,
Thank you for your email.
The parking charge was issued on 28th October 2025 by our
parking operative at Stratford Shopping Centre - No permit. Your
name and address were obtained from the DVLA, as you are the
registered keeper of the vehicle. The parking charge notice was
sent to you on 5th November 2025 and a final reminder was sent
to you on 19th November 2025. Please see attached PDF copies of
these notices. After no payment or appeal was received from you,
the parking charge was passed to debt recovery for further
action.
Please note that as stated on out initial parking charge notice,
an appeal must be made within 28 days of the date of the initial
parking charge.
The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 states that if after 29
days, the Parking Charge has not been paid in full, and the
operator does not know both the name and current address of the
driver, that they have the right to recover any unpaid part of
the Parking Charge from the Registered Keeper. 
We received your appeal on 5th December 2025 which was responded
to as a gesture of goodwill. A letter was sent on 11th December
2025 stating that the parking charge had been correctly issued.
Please see the attached PDF copy of this letter.
The parking charges issued by UK Parking Control Limited are
based on a contractual agreement between UKPC and the driver, as
detailed on the signage displayed in the car park. The signage
states the terms and conditions of parking and explains that a
parking charge will be payable if the terms are not met by the
driver. We ensure that signage is ample, clear and visible,
wholly in line with the British Parking Association Code of
Practice. It is settled law that a driver is deemed to have
accepted the terms and conditions of parking by the act of
parking and leaving a vehicle.
We can confirm that UKPC hold the relevant authority from the
Landowner or their agent to operate parking management and as a
result, issue parking charges on site.
If you do not agree with our decision, you have the opportunity
to appeal to POPLA, information on how to do this is provided
with our appeal response.
Please be advised that UKPC is a member of the British Parking
Association and Approved Operator Scheme, which means that we
are a member of a well regulated industry and conform to the
relevant requirements and regulations.
Thank you.
Kind regards,
Complaints Department [/quote]
#Post#: 104958--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC: Parked in a permit area without displaying a permit
By: DWMB2 Date: January 7, 2026, 9:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
What was the original appeal?
[quote author=Plywood-Enthusiast
link=topic=8849.msg104944#msg104944 date=1767793687]
Can I make a draft appeal with just the default POFA
non-compliant line and add the other 3 reasons later?
[/quote]
You can only submit your POPLA appeal once. The codes are
generally valid for 33 days to allow for delivery of the
rejection notice.
[quote author=Plywood-Enthusiast
link=topic=8849.msg104944#msg104944 date=1767793687]
1) non pofa compliant letter to RK[/quote]
I would put this #2. A linked (but different) issue is that UKPC
have not proved that the vehicle was parked for longer than the
minimum consideration period of 5 minutes as required by the
Private Parking Sector Single Code of Practice. I would lead
with this point, as this means that no contract can have been
formed between the driver and UKPC, regardless of any other
technical points that might apply. Although whether this point
is likely to work depends somewhat on what has been said in the
original appeal.
[quote author=Plywood-Enthusiast
link=topic=8849.msg104944#msg104944 date=1767793687]
2) procedural impropriety - blocking the appeal within the 28
day period.[/quote]
I'd probably save this for a complaint - they have, eventually,
allowed you to appeal (hence why you're now submitting a POPLA
appeal) - probably no harm in mentioning it, but if you do, I'd
put it at the bottom underneath your stronger points as to why
no money is owed.
#Post#: 104960--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC: Parked in a permit area without displaying a permit
By: Plywood-Enthusiast Date: January 7, 2026, 9:46 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Original complaints letter:
[quote]Dear Sir/Madam
PARKING CHARGE REF: 3043353011604
Reg: KY08WTL
I am the keeper and NOT the driver of the vehicle. I have been
blocked from making an appeal through the UKPCappeals.co.uk
website, stating it has been sent for collections. An attempted
was made to appeal online on 2nd December 2025
UK PC has blocked my appeal, meanwhile UKPC is still happy to
accept the £100 payment for the parking charge. I am still
within my statutory right of appeal within 28 days of receipt.
The PPSCoP talks about 28 days from when the keeper "receives"
the notice, and then explains how “receipt” is worked out for
something sent by post.
In my case the timeline is quite straightforward. The alleged
contravention was on 28/10/2025. The Notice to Keeper (NtK) is
dated 05/11/2025. The PPSCoP says that a notice sent by post is
presumed delivered on the second working day after the date of
posting, unless you can prove otherwise. If UKPC actually posted
it on 05/11, the first working day is Thursday 06/11 and the
second working day is Friday 07/11. So, for the purposes of the
PPSCoP, the NtK is treated as received on 07/11/2025.
The 28-day appeal window in the PPSCoP then runs from that date
of deemed receipt, not from the 5th. So Count 28 days from
07/11/2025 and you land on 05/12/2025. That is the last day on
which the Keeper must be allowed to lodge an appeal under the
Code.
I tried to use the online appeals portal on 02/12/2025, which is
only day 25 from deemed receipt. In other words, my appeal
attempt was comfortably within the 28-day period the PPSCoP
requires.
Now put that alongside what the Code actually says. Section
8.1.2(e) requires that the notice itself tells the recipient
they can appeal if they do so within 28 days of receiving the
parking charge. The Note under that sub-paragraph is the bit
that sets out the “second working day” presumption I have
quoted. Section 8.4.1 then says that operators must provide a
process which allows the parking charge to be appealed within 28
days, and at §8.4.1(c) it goes further and says they must
consider late appeals where the motorist can show exceptional
circumstances.
UKPC’s system blocking an appeal on 02/12/2025, and declaring
that the case had been sent to debt recovery even though the 28
days from receipt had not yet expired, is flatly contrary to
both 8.1.2(e) and 8.4.1(a). I have screenshots to prove this
which will be going through the complaints procedure.
That deemed-delivery rule also contains the escape clause I
pointed out: the presumption applies “unless the contrary is
proved”. UKPC will be put to strict proof of the date the notice
actually entered the postal system using a genuine first-class
(1–2 day) service. They will not be able to do so. Your
invariably rely on hybrid-mail systems offering 2–3 day delivery
with no individual proof of posting and no evidence of the exact
day the NtK entered Royal Mail’s network.
My captured screenshots of the online appeal page and payment
page, showing the date and time when their system wrongly stated
that appeals were closed and the matter was with a debt
collector, while still happily offering you a £100 payment
button. I have also sent a written appeal to UKPC in the
keeper’s name, which does not identify the driver.
The narrative for the formal complaint and appeal is therefore
simple: contravention on 28/10, NtK dated 05/11, deemed receipt
on 07/11 under the PPSCoP, and an online appeal attempt on 02/12
which was within the 28-day period. The refusal to accept that
appeal is a breach of 8.1.2(e) and 8.4.1(a). The previous
written appeal must therefore be treated as an in-time appeal
and processed accordingly, with either cancellation or a
rejection including a POPLA code.
Section 11.2 of the PPSCoP then bites. That clause says that
where a parking operator receives a complaint that it considers
to be or include an appeal against the validity of a parking
charge, it must treat it as an appeal for the purposes of the
8.4 timescales unless and until it is clear that the complaint
is not relevant to an appeal. The complaint is plainly about the
validity of the charge and the handling of the appeal window, so
UKPC are required to treat it as an appeal under the Code.
The escalation narrative is then completed by noting that
continuing to block an in-time appeal and pushing the consumer
towards “debt collection” while misrepresenting their appeal
rights is not only a PPSCoP breach but also an unfair commercial
practice under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers
Act 2024. This behaviour involves misleading actions and
omissions concerning the consumer’s rights of redress, and the
use of aggressive commercial pressure. It is conduct that may
fall within the CMA’s enforcement remit under the DMCC. If the
person reading the complaint does not understand the
implications of that, they should pass it immediately to a
responsible adult within UKPC who has the intellectual capacity
to do so.
Finally, the keeper makes clear that if UKPC refuse to recognise
the appeal as in-time or fail to issue a proper rejection with a
POPLA code, the matter will be escalated to the BPA, the DVLA,
and the CMA for breaches of the PPSCoP, misuse of DVLA data, and
unfair commercial practices under the DMCC.
My appeal on this parking charge was supposed to be as follows,
please consider this a valid on time appeal:
I am the keeper of the vehicle and NOT the driver, 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. UKPC 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.
UKPC have no hope at POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a
complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.
You are invited to either cancel this charge or issue a POPLA
appeal code
Kind Regards
RK details here - reiterated keeper not driver.
[/quote]
#Post#: 105019--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC: Parked in a permit area without displaying a permit
By: Plywood-Enthusiast Date: January 7, 2026, 2:52 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=DWMB2 link=topic=8849.msg104958#msg104958
date=1767799431]
What was the original appeal?
[quote author=Plywood-Enthusiast
link=topic=8849.msg104944#msg104944 date=1767793687]
Can I make a draft appeal with just the default POFA
non-compliant line and add the other 3 reasons later?
[/quote]
You can only submit your POPLA appeal once. The codes are
generally valid for 33 days to allow for delivery of the
rejection notice.
[quote author=Plywood-Enthusiast
link=topic=8849.msg104944#msg104944 date=1767793687]
1) non pofa compliant letter to RK[/quote]
I would put this #2. A linked (but different) issue is that UKPC
have not proved that the vehicle was parked for longer than the
minimum consideration period of 5 minutes as required by the
Private Parking Sector Single Code of Practice. I would lead
with this point, as this means that no contract can have been
formed between the driver and UKPC, regardless of any other
technical points that might apply. Although whether this point
is likely to work depends somewhat on what has been said in the
original appeal.
[quote author=Plywood-Enthusiast
link=topic=8849.msg104944#msg104944 date=1767793687]
2) procedural impropriety - blocking the appeal within the 28
day period.[/quote]
I'd probably save this for a complaint - they have, eventually,
allowed you to appeal (hence why you're now submitting a POPLA
appeal) - probably no harm in mentioning it, but if you do, I'd
put it at the bottom underneath your stronger points as to why
no money is owed.
[/quote]
Good call on the non contratual agreement reached. the photos
span a grand total of 12 seconds, 4 photos taken. The PCO was
clearly in a rush. Didnt even have time to print out a physical
parking charge and put it on the windscreen.
Just wanted to ask. WHat is the attachment count limit for POPLA
appeal. Do I have to put everything into one PDF document?
#Post#: 105024--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC: Parked in a permit area without displaying a permit
By: DWMB2 Date: January 7, 2026, 3:45 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
If you're going with the lack of proper consideration period
point, I'd be minded to leave out the point about loading. It's
a valid point, but not one that POPLA usually agree with in my
experience, and also one that might weaken the consideration
period point.
[quote author=Plywood-Enthusiast
link=topic=8849.msg104944#msg104944 date=1767793687]
The PCO was clearly in a rush. Didnt even have time to print out
a physical parking charge and put it on the windscreen.
[/quote]
UKPC rarely issue windscreen tickets - it won't be because the
attendant was in a rush, it'll be because they don't use
windscreen tickets at that location.
[quote author=Plywood-Enthusiast
link=topic=8849.msg104944#msg104944 date=1767793687]
WHat is the attachment count limit for POPLA appeal.[/quote]
I'm not sure. It's generally easier for the assessor to follow
if you can just give them one PDF with everything in, rather
than several files that you need them to jump back and forth
between.
#Post#: 105032--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC: Parked in a permit area without displaying a permit
By: Plywood-Enthusiast Date: January 7, 2026, 4:52 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=DWMB2 link=topic=8849.msg105024#msg105024
date=1767822347]
If you're going with the lack of proper consideration period
point, I'd be minded to leave out the point about loading. It's
a valid point, but not one that POPLA usually agree with in my
experience, and also one that might weaken the consideration
period point.
[quote author=Plywood-Enthusiast
link=topic=8849.msg104944#msg104944 date=1767793687]
The PCO was clearly in a rush. Didnt even have time to print out
a physical parking charge and put it on the windscreen.
[/quote]
UKPC rarely issue windscreen tickets - it won't be because the
attendant was in a rush, it'll be because they don't use
windscreen tickets at that location.
[quote author=Plywood-Enthusiast
link=topic=8849.msg104944#msg104944 date=1767793687]
WHat is the attachment count limit for POPLA appeal.[/quote]
I'm not sure. It's generally easier for the assessor to follow
if you can just give them one PDF with everything in, rather
than several files that you need them to jump back and forth
between.
[/quote]
RK just got the document sent in. I'll upload if interestest. It
was a very long time since I helped do a POPLA appeal. and I
almost came acropper on the POPLA form, when I was wizzing
though and make RK select the option where they inadvertetly
claim to be the driver... improper signage is one of my reasons
and I almost selected "there was inadequate signage when I was
driving" as the option. Got RK to go back and choose "was not
the RK or driver option". Fortunately I caught it in time.
#Post#: 105052--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC: Parked in a permit area without displaying a permit
By: DWMB2 Date: January 8, 2026, 4:07 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote] Got RK to go back and choose "was not the RK or driver
option". [/quote]
Ideally they should just select "other". They are the RK, so
saying they were not is not correct.
It shouldn't affect too much.
*****************************************************
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page