URI:
   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 correct
       ly within the markings of the bay or space.
       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 co
       rrectly within the markings of the bay or space.
       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.[/quote]
       #Post#: 101023--------------------------------------------------
       Re: UKCPS- Snowhill retail park Wakefield, NTK for not parked co
       rrectly within the markings of the bay or space.
       By: boxer29 Date: December 4, 2025, 11:30 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=b789 link=topic=9025.msg100979#msg100979
       date=1764853832]
       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.[/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 cor
       rectly within the markings of the bay or space.
       By: boxer29 Date: December 15, 2025, 10:22 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Got this in email, went to my junk mail though.
       [img width=64
       height=64]
  HTML https://i.ibb.co/KRg7g94/Letter-from-UKCPS.png[/img]
  HTML https://ibb.co/KRg7g94
       #Post#: 102544--------------------------------------------------
       Re: UKPC- Snowhill retail park Wakefield, NTK for not parked cor
       rectly within the markings of the bay or space.
       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][/quote]
       #Post#: 112094--------------------------------------------------
       Re: UKPC- Snowhill retail park Wakefield, NTK for not parked cor
       rectly within the markings of the bay or space.
       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
       [img width=423
       height=640]
  HTML https://i.ibb.co/4R4ZnwqH/20260304-200920.jpg[/img]
  HTML https://ibb.co/9Hy9kmD7
       *****************************************************