Stansted drop-off charge appeal

ottomann

Hello, I received an NTK related to use of express touch-down / drop-off zone at Stansted airport an I plan to appeal on the basis that this is not relevant land under POFA 2012 sch4. I am not going to identify myself (or anyone else) as the driver.

I would very much appreciate your thoughts and advice on the following:

1. Does my Appeal below look good? I expect it to be rejected, but my plan is to use generally the same language in POPLA appeal.

2. After I was made aware that the £7 charge was not paid, I did pay it, but it was already after the „midnight the following day” deadline. Should I mention that I paid in my appeal or this would be considered acknowledging liability or otherwise weaken my case?

To be clear, I am not going to pay the penalty charge itself as this is explicitly considers admitting the liability.

3. What do you think are my chances of winning the appeal at POPLA level or you think they at likely to eventually litigate and if so, what are my chances in court?

4. Are there any other grounds on which I should appeal? I think the signage at this particular site is clear and that 5 minutes consideration period does not apply (although my stay was below 5 minutes).

Thank you!

APPEAL

I am writing to you in my capacity as the keeper of the vehicle referenced in the Notice to Keeper [ref] issued on [date].

I reject any liability related to the alleged incident for the following reasons:

1. Keeper liability cannot be invoked in this case. The alleged incident occurred within the grounds of Stansted Airport. This area is governed by Stansted Airport Byelaws 1997, made under the Aviation Security Act 1982. Airport land is not 'relevant land' as it is already covered by statutory bylaws and so is specifically excluded from 'keeper liability' under Sch4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.

2. In my capacity as the registered keeper, I am under no obligation to identify the driver and I refuse to do so. Outwith the POFA, parking firms cannot invoke 'keeper liability' nor can they allege that the keeper was the driver. This legal point has already been tested on appeal in private parking cases: (i) Excel Parking Services Ltd v Anthony Smith (C0DP9C4E, June 2017) and (ii) Vehicle Control Services Ltd v Ian Edward (H0KF6C9C, April 2023).

In case you decide to reject my appeal, I request the following:

- Notice of Rejection including a POPLA verification code.

- Confirmation that the reduced charge period continues to apply while the appeal to POPLA is under consideration

ChirpyChicken

Use this , again appeal as the keeper

This is an appeal by the registered keeper - No driver details will *ever* be given. Please do not bother with your known fishing expedition in an attempt to get driver details.  It is known parking firms do this to try and get around the fact when there is no keeper liability in play. (and never can be under POFA)

Due to this being airport land you will be well aware there is NO keeper liability due to the byelaws in force and thus not relevant land.

As there is NO keeper liability then liability cannot flow from the driver to the keeper and thus is an auto win @ POPLA. Please therefore cancel the notice or issue a POPLA code where you will auto withdraw

If you waste your time asking for driver details this will be ignored and you will still lose at POPLA if you dont cancel the PCN

So let's save my time and yours and cancel this PCN you simply cannot win this (and you know it)