DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 100958--------------------------------------------------
UKPC- Snowhill retail park Wakefield, NTK for not parked
correctly within the markings of the bay or space.
DIR By: boxer29
Date: December 4, 2025, 5:31 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi,
i got the NTK dated 21.11.25 posted on 24.11.25 While the driver
was in Snowhill retail park Wakefield " not parked correctly
within the markings of the bay or space." in the pictures my
rear tyres are on the boxes.
The driver went to do a return in one of the shops for hardly 10
min, parked in disabled bay with blue badge displayed on dash.
i have been given as the registered keeper 14 days from the date
of issue of this parking charge to pay £ 60.
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/BtJ3ZaethxL4itb66
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/S7BZcKfZQPnr8huX6
The signage is not clear nor in picture or not on the paycharge
portal.
HTML https://i.ibb.co/JRMP5Srk/20251204-110051.jpg
HTML https://ibb.co/JRMP5Srk
Thanks
#Post#: 100979--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKCPS- Snowhill retail park Wakefield, NTK for not parked
correctly within the markings of the bay or space.
DIR By: b789
Date: December 4, 2025, 7:10 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Nobody pays a penny to UKPC if they follow the advice they
receive here. Their Notice to Keeper (NtK) is not fully
compliant with PoFA 2012 which means that as long as the driver
is not identified, they cannot hold the Keeper liable.
Unlike in your narrative, where you have clearly intimated that
you, the recipient of the NtK, were the driver. All you must
ever do is, as the Keeper, refer to the driver in the third
party. No "I did this or that", only "the driver did this or
that". You may want toed your opening post!
Np initial appeal will ever be successful so we don't waste much
time or effort on it. The aim is to get a POPLA code with the
rejection, which is then valid for 33 days and make a more
substantive appeal to them, for what it's worth.
Even if POPLA is unsuccessful, you do not pay. Their decision is
not binding on you. It will go all the way to a county court
claim which we provide the relevant template defence and in due
course (9-12+ months) the claim is either struck out or
discontinued.
For now, 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. 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.
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 101023--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKCPS- Snowhill retail park Wakefield, NTK for not parked
correctly within the markings of the bay or space.
DIR By: boxer29
Date: December 4, 2025, 11:30 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: b789 link ---
>
> Nobody pays a penny to UKPC if they follow the advice they
receive here. Their Notice to Keeper (NtK) is not fully
compliant with PoFA 2012 which means that as long as the driver
is not identified, they cannot hold the Keeper liable.
>
> Unlike in your narrative, where you have clearly intimated
that you, the recipient of the NtK, were the driver. All you
must ever do is, as the Keeper, refer to the driver in the third
party. No "I did this or that", only "the driver did this or
that". You may want toed your opening post!
>
> Np initial appeal will ever be successful so we don't waste
much time or effort on it. The aim is to get a POPLA code with
the rejection, which is then valid for 33 days and make a more
substantive appeal to them, for what it's worth.
>
> Even if POPLA is unsuccessful, you do not pay. Their decision
is not binding on you. It will go all the way to a county court
claim which we provide the relevant template defence and in due
course (9-12+ months) the claim is either struck out or
discontinued.
>
> For now, 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. 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.
--- End Quote ---
[/quote]
Thanks b789,
i have logged an appeal as a registered keeper of the vehicle to
UKPC online portal.
#Post#: 102524--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC- Snowhill retail park Wakefield, NTK for not parked
correctly within the markings of the bay or space.
DIR By: boxer29
Date: December 15, 2025, 10:22 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Got this in email, went to my junk mail though.
HTML https://i.ibb.co/KRg7g94/Letter-from-UKCPS.png
HTML https://ibb.co/KRg7g94
#Post#: 102544--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC- Snowhill retail park Wakefield, NTK for not parked
correctly within the markings of the bay or space.
DIR By: b789
Date: December 15, 2025, 11:22 am
---------------------------------------------------------
You can reply with this:
--- Quote ---
> Subject: PCN 3115253251731 – Your improper request for driver
details
>
> I am the registered keeper.
>
> Your email is noted and your request that I “confirm the full
name and address of the driver” is refused.
>
> There is no legal obligation on a keeper to identify a driver.
Your attempt to strong-arm the keeper into naming the driver
within 7 days is inappropriate and will not succeed. You already
have everything you need to either cancel the charge or issue a
rejection with a POPLA verification code.
>
> Accordingly, stop fishing for driver details and now determine
the appeal based on the information already provided. If you
reject, you must provide a POPLA code without further delay.
>
> For the avoidance of doubt, I will not enter into any
correspondence about the driver’s identity. Any further emails
repeating this demand will be treated as harassment and evidence
of unreasonable conduct.
>
> Yours faithfully,
>
> [Keeper name]
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 112094--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC- Snowhill retail park Wakefield, NTK for not parked
correctly within the markings of the bay or space.
DIR By: boxer29
Date: March 4, 2026, 2:18 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Got this letter from ZZPS in post 3 days dated 10.2.2026 which i
have attached in this post
Action required : outstanding Balance.
Shall i ignore it or what should be your advice.
Thanks
HTML https://i.ibb.co/4R4ZnwqH/20260304-200920.jpg
HTML https://ibb.co/9Hy9kmD7
#Post#: 122161--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC- Snowhill retail park Wakefield, NTK for not parked
correctly within the markings of the bay or space.
DIR By: boxer29
Date: June 17, 2026, 6:30 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
i have got after a quiet period another letter from dcb legal
last week to pay the outstanding charges.
i have uploaded the letter for you to have a look and advise.
HTML https://i.ibb.co/7djBqttr/20260617-080245.jpg
HTML https://ibb.co/1t7BkGGR
HTML https://i.ibb.co/tw93SgLg/20260617-080431.jpg
HTML https://ibb.co/7xqbHPkP
Thanks for your help .
#Post#: 124643--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC- Snowhill retail park Wakefield, NTK for not parked
correctly within the markings of the bay or space.
DIR By: boxer29
Date: July 14, 2026, 9:20 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Today in post i got the Claim form in the Civil National
business Centre with issue date of 09.July 2026
Claimant: Uk parking control Limited, Eastcastle house 27/28
Eastcastle Street London W1W 8DH.
its N1SDT form
and N9A Admission form
N9B Defence and counterclaim form.
They are asking for total 263.04.
how do i respond to this form.
Thanks for your help and support
#Post#: 124648--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC- Snowhill retail park Wakefield, NTK for not parked
correctly within the markings of the bay or space.
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: July 14, 2026, 9:40 am
---------------------------------------------------------
We can't offer much advice on a form we haven't seen, please
show us.
#Post#: 124651--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC- Snowhill retail park Wakefield, NTK for not parked
correctly within the markings of the bay or space.
DIR By: jfollows
Date: July 14, 2026, 10:01 am
---------------------------------------------------------
As said, please don’t ask for advice without giving us the
information we need to be able to provide the advice.
We only need the front page of the N1SDT form, obscure personal
details including the password, but not dates or the Particulars
of Claim.
I can note that you have 14+5 days from the day on the N1SDT
form to respond, either with an Acknowledgement of Service (AoS)
or with a defence. If the former, you have an additional 14 days
to file your defence. This can all be done online using the
information on the N1SDT form.
So what if your defence going to be? Non-compliance with PoFA
2012, eg no “period of parking” for example? You said it’s not
compliant but at least for the next stage you probably need to
say why it isn’t compliant. Signage? Many of these claims are
discontinued if defended, but at least a defence which isn’t a
boilerplate/template but instead addresses the Particulars of
Claim on the N1SDT form and the specific circumstances needs to
be filed in response.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 3
DIR Next Page