DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 102477--------------------------------------------------
ECP Parking charge- Blackheath station
By: black diamond Date: December 15, 2025, 5:30 am
---------------------------------------------------------
hi I received this letter today and I would like to appeal but I
thought I would get advice first before I do go ahead. please
see letter attached to this post. let me know if I need to add
anything else more. Thanks in advance
HTML https://ibb.co/5hCZZ8nC
#Post#: 102478--------------------------------------------------
Re: ECP Parking charge- Blackheath station
By: jfollows Date: December 15, 2025, 5:38 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The rear of the letter you posted, please.
#Post#: 102484--------------------------------------------------
Re: ECP Parking charge- Blackheath station
By: black diamond Date: December 15, 2025, 5:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
sorry, here's the back of the letter
HTML https://ibb.co/67R4745B
#Post#: 102486--------------------------------------------------
Re: ECP Parking charge- Blackheath station
By: b789 Date: December 15, 2025, 5:58 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Just appeal ONLY as the Keeper. 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 location is not "relevant land" for the purposes of PoFA
2012 (for now), 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 registered keeper. ECP cannot hold a registered
keeper liable for any alleged contravention on land that is
under statutory control. As a matter of fact and law, ECP will
be well aware that they cannot use the PoFA provisions because
Blackheath Station is not 'relevant land', yet!
If Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd wanted to hold owners or
keepers liable under Railway Byelaws, that would be within the
landowner's gift and another matter entirely. However, not only
is that not pleaded, it is also not legally possible because ECP
is not the station owner and your 'parking charge' is not and
never attempts to be a penalty. It is created for ECP’s own
profit (as opposed to a bylaws penalty that goes to the public
purse) and ECP 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.
ECP have no hope at POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a
complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.[/quote]
#Post#: 105899--------------------------------------------------
Re: ECP Parking charge- Blackheath station
By: black diamond Date: January 14, 2026, 12:23 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for your letter appeal help. I received a reply on 8th
January and they have rejected my appeal and said there's
nothing else more I can do. Please see the photos attached. What
do I do next now?
HTML https://ibb.co/5h8MFw0c
HTML https://ibb.co/FLkxzVZV
HTML https://ibb.co/tM8SQgsV
#Post#: 105907--------------------------------------------------
Re: ECP Parking charge- Blackheath station
By: jfollows Date: January 14, 2026, 12:57 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
You appeal to POPLA, no hurry, see for example
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/ecp-shell-gatwick-alleged-overstay/msg98233/#msg98233
Your argument is the same, that this was not “relevant land” for
the purpose of PoFA at the time, so the liability can not be
transferred from the unknown driver to the registered keeper.
It’s simpler than this example because if you were parked in the
station car park on railway land, that’s reason enough. You
don’t have to dig through maps.
You should construct a simplified version of this appeal and
post it here so we can advise you further. If you’re lucky, ECP
will give up similarly.
#Post#: 108599--------------------------------------------------
Re: ECP Parking charge- Blackheath station
By: black diamond Date: February 3, 2026, 3:51 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Im just about to do the appeal, would it fall under 'I was not
the driver or the registered keeper of the vehicle at the time
of the alleged improper parking.' or 'other'?
#Post#: 108603--------------------------------------------------
Re: ECP Parking charge- Blackheath station
By: DWMB2 Date: February 3, 2026, 4:05 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Given that you are the keeper, the first option would be
incorrect. Choose 'Other'. Do you not wish to share a copy of
your proposed appeal here for feedback?
#Post#: 108607--------------------------------------------------
Re: ECP Parking charge- Blackheath station
By: black diamond Date: February 3, 2026, 4:44 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you here’s my draft:
POPLA Appeal - Non-Relevant Land (Railway Byelaws)
I am appealing this Parking Charge Notice as the registered
keeper of the vehicle.
I am not liable for this charge because the location in
question- Blackheath Station car park, London is railway land
subject to statutory control under the Railway Byelaws. As such,
it is not “relevant land” for the purposes of Schedule 4 of the
Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA).
Accordingly, keeper liability cannot apply and Euro Car Parks
Ltd (“ECP”) has no lawful basis to pursue the registered keeper.
1. The Land Is Not “Relevant Land” Under PoFA
Schedule 4, Paragraph 3 of PoFA expressly excludes land that is
subject to statutory control, including land governed by Railway
Byelaws.
Blackheath Station is a railway station, and its car park forms
part of the operational railway estate. Car parks at railway
stations are subject to the Railway Byelaws, regardless of
whether parking management is outsourced to a private company.
This point alone is determinative. Where Railway Byelaws apply,
PoFA cannot be used to transfer liability from the unknown
driver to the registered keeper.
2. “Private Land” Does Not Mean “Relevant Land”
ECP appears to rely on the incorrect assumption that because the
site is described as “private land,” PoFA applies.
This is legally wrong.
Land can be privately owned yet still be excluded from PoFA if
it is subject to statutory control. Train station car parks are
a well-established example of this. POPLA has consistently
recognised that railway land is not relevant land for PoFA
purposes.
3. Failure to Demonstrate Keeper Liability
ECP has failed to demonstrate that the site is relevant land.
The burden of proof rests entirely with the operator.
They have provided:
no evidence that Railway Byelaws do not apply,
no confirmation from the landowner or rail authority,
no statutory instrument showing that byelaws have been
disapplied to this specific site.
In the absence of such evidence, POPLA must conclude that the
land is under statutory control and PoFA does not apply.
4. Breach of the Private Parking Single Code of Practice
(PPSCoP)
Despite PoFA being inapplicable, ECP issued a Notice to Keeper
asserting keeper liability.
This is a breach of PPSCoP Section 8.1.1(d), which states:
“The parking operator must not serve a notice which in its
design and/or language states the keeper is liable under the
Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 where they cannot be held
liable.”
ECP has issued a misleading Notice to Keeper in a location where
keeper liability is legally impossible.
5. Failure to Properly Consider the Initial Appeal
I raised the issue of non-relevant land in my initial appeal.
ECP’s rejection was a generic response referring only to ANPR
images, signage, and length of stay. It made no attempt
whatsoever to address the land status or the applicability of
PoFA.
This indicates that my appeal was not properly considered and
further undermines the operator’s position.
Conclusion
The site is railway land subject to Railway Byelaws
It is not relevant land under PoFA Schedule 4
Keeper liability cannot apply
The Notice to Keeper is misleading and non-compliant
ECP has failed to meet its burden of proof
I respectfully request that POPLA allows this appeal.
#Post#: 108640--------------------------------------------------
Re: ECP Parking charge- Blackheath station
By: DWMB2 Date: February 4, 2026, 1:56 am
---------------------------------------------------------
It might be worth a line or two highlighting the date of the
alleged contravention.
Railway land is now "relevant land", but, importantly, wasn't at
the time this event took place. For clarity, it may be worth
pointing this out.
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page