NtK - 'Vehicle not Parked within a marked Bay'

OldKenobi

Hi all,

Hope you can help sanity check my situation (I have read the newbies thread).

Recieved a postal Notice to Keeper yesterday (23/24/2025).
No windscreen ticket was issued previously.

Key details are as follows:

 

• Date of Parking Event: 31/03/2025
• Date NTK Issued/Posted: 15/04/2025 (this date is on the NTK)
• Date NTK Received by Post: 23/04/2025
• Private Parking Company: Parking Group Limited (They are a BPA member)
• Relevant period started 01/04/2025 and ended on 14/04/2025.
• Alleged Contravention: Vehicle not Parked within a marked Bay
  
  My understanding is that for postal NTKs under PoFA 2012 Sch 4 Para 9, it must be 'given' within 14 days starting the day after the parking event.
  
  The Parking event was 31/03/2025.
  Relevant period started 01/04/2025 and ended on 14/04/2025.
  
  The NTK must be presumed 'given' (delivered) on the second working day after the day of posting (PoFA Para 9(6)). "Working day" excludes weekends and bank holidays in England & Wales.
  
  NTK Posted: Tuesday 15/04/2025
• Day after posting 1: Wednesday 16/04/2025 (Working Day 1)
• Day after posting 2: Thursday 17/04/2025 (Working Day 2)
• (The subsequent days were Good Friday 18/04 (Bank Holiday), Sat 19/04, Sun 20/04, Easter Monday 21/04 (Bank Holiday)).

Presumed 'given' date = The second working day after posting = Thursday 17/04/2025.

Unless I've run the numbers wrong, this would be outside of the ‘relevant period’ that ended on 14/04/2025 so conditions for keeper liability under PoFA paragraph 9 haven't been met.

I've submitted an initial appeal online via the PPC's portal, strictly as the keeper.

I did not reveal the identity of the driver and stated no assumptions could be drawn.

My appeal used wording based on the NEWBIES template (denied liability, requested evidence of the signage at the site, mentioned PoFA non-compliance generally but didn't detail the dates in the initial appeal).

 

 

 

I dispute your 'parking charge', as the keeper of the vehicle. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. 

Since your PCN is a vague template, I require an explanation of the allegation and your evidence. 

You must include a close up actual photograph of the sign you contend was at the location on the material date as well as your images of the vehicle.

If the allegation concerns a PDT machine, the data supplied in response to this appeal must include the record of payments made - showing partial VRNs - and an explanation of the reason for the PCN, because your Notice does not explain it.

If the allegation involves an alleged overstay of minutes, your evidence must include the actual grace period agreed by the 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. Parking Group has relied on contract law allegations of breach against the driver only.

The 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. Parking Group have no hope at POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.

 

Do my calculations for the PoFA timing issue look correct?

Assuming that Parking Group reject the initial appeal, is the late service the strongest point to use for the POPLA appeal?

Is there anything else I should do now, other than wait for what is likely an inevitable rejection and and POPLA code?

I've also included a link to the NTK below, along with photographs of the place where the alleged contravention took place.

Link to NTK and parking area map - drive.proton.me/urls/7KXZ9SBVPM#XAd0KXdX0qqs

A user called tricklepip also had an issue with this exact same parking area last year - his post was also titled PCN - 'Vehicle not Parked within a marked Bay' if that helps for reference

Gr1pr

I think that your analysis seems to fit the bill

If they failed to comply with  Pofa2012  then no keeper liability would be the main focus of any popla appeal 

OldKenobi

Gr1pr said:

I think that your analysis seems to fit the bill

If they failed to comply with  Pofa2012  then no keeper liability would be the main focus of any popla appeal 

Thanks for confirming, just thought it prudent to get a second pair of eyes on all this.

I'll await the 1st stage appeal results and will update once I hear back.