PoFA to apply to all railway locations that are subject to byelaws from 26th December

troublemaker22

Well I suppose Saba could say anything.  They could say they own, manage and control all the car parks themselves or that the earth is flat. The question is whether a court will believe them in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary including the items below.  But I take your point that nothing can be taken for granted, especially in the County Court where justice must not only be done, it must be seen to be believed.  So an alternative defence based on byelaws for pre Boxing Day cases might be a good idea. 

troublemaker22

In addition both TfL and Saba proclaim on their websites that these station car parks are TfL car parks

https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/station-car-parks.

ChirpyChicken

troublemaker22 said:

Well I suppose Saba could say anything.  They could say they own, manage and control all the car parks themselves or that the earth is flat. The question is whether a court will believe them in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary including the items below.  But I take your point that nothing can be taken for granted, especially in the County Court where justice must not only be done, it must be seen to be believed.  So an alternative defence based on byelaws for pre Boxing Day cases might be a good idea. 

Agreed however we see so few court claims from SABA on Byelaw or non Byelaw cases that we can cross that bridge when we come to it (yes i know that can change at the flick of a submission to DCBL et al!)

troublemaker22

I've not been able to goad SABA into starting court proceedings, but they do fight these cases at POPLA.  I haven't had one at POPLA since gathering the evidence that these are all TfL carparks and it will be interesting to see whether the POPLA assessors make a mess of the TfL appeals as they did (do?) with airport appeals 

troublemaker22

Sorry for the overkill, but here's a link to and screenshot of TfL's announcement that TfL's station car parks are managed by Saba https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/station-car-parks 

ChirpyChicken

@troublemaker22 maybe try and get a couple of tickets just to the test the water if your so inclined😅

doubledotcom

I'd be more than happy to do that. Trouble for me is that TfL don't range as far as Liverpool. I was still trying to find a station near me that is still trying to issue Penalty Notices within range.

doubledotcom

Just to prove a point about how TfL will try to con the motorists, I sent the following simple FoI request to TfL back in May:

Please confirm whether the North Greenwich Station Car Park (postcode SE10 0PH), currently managed by Saba Park Services UK Ltd on behalf of TTL Properties Limited, remains subject to the TfL Railway Byelaws 2011. If the site was ever subject to those byelaws and they have since been revoked or superseded, please provide details of the revocation or modification.

This was the response they gave:

No, Saba UK are not subject to TfL Byelaws, as Saba UK operate under private land enforcement and under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.

Of course, this was a juicy invitation to respond, which I did as follows:

Subject: Request for Internal Review – FOI-0703-2526 (North Greenwich Station Car Park)

Dear FOI Team,

I am writing to request an internal review of your response to my FOI request (reference FOI-0703-2526), regarding the status of North Greenwich Station Car Park and whether it remains subject to the TfL Railway Byelaws 2011.

Your response states:

“No, Saba UK are not subject to TfL Byelaws, as Saba UK operate under private land enforcement and under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.”

This is an evasive and legally inadequate answer that does not address the substance of the request. The question was not whether Saba UK chooses to enforce parking under PoFA, but whether the land itself at North Greenwich Station remains subject to TfL Railway Byelaws 2011, as made under the Greater London Authority Act 1999.

My request was specific and factual. It sought:

• Confirmation of whether byelaws currently apply to the land at SE10 0PH;

• If they do not apply, whether and when they were formally revoked or superseded, and by what legal or administrative mechanism.

Your answer did not provide this. It simply restated the operator’s current enforcement choice, which is legally irrelevant to the land’s status under PoFA 2012 Schedule 4.

For the record, unless and until TfL formally revokes its byelaws over a specific site, or unless the site is reclassified through a published legal instrument, that land remains subject to statutory control. A contractor’s self-declared reliance on civil enforcement does not alter the legal classification of the land.

I therefore request the following as part of this internal review:

1. A proper response confirming the legal status of the land, not the practices of the contractor;

2. Copies or references to any documents or orders showing revocation, disapplication or amendment of the TfL Railway Byelaws 2011 as they apply to North Greenwich Station Car Park;

3. An explanation of why my original question was not properly addressed.

If you cannot provide evidence of revocation or reclassification, you must confirm that the land remains subject to the 2011 Byelaws.

Yours sincerely,

And their review response:

Following your email of 29 May a review has been carried out by an independent review panel (‘the panel’) consisting of individuals who were not involved in the handling of your request...

...The panel have liaised with the appropriate subject matter experts and we have been unable to identify the specific information you seek in the contract that we hold with SABA UK. Additionally our legal team have liaised with SABA UK and they have also been unsuccessful in locating recorded confirmation of what you seek. Therefore on the balance of probabilities the panel agree that it’s likely the information is not held.  Please accept our apologies for any inconvenience that may have been caused.

With respect of the Byelaws the contract with SABA UK states the following -

 - 21. Compliance with Policies and Law

21.1.2 shall provide the Services in compliance with and shall ensure that the Service Provider's Personnel comply with all requirements of all Acts of Parliament, statutory instruments, court orders, regulations, directives, European Community decisions (insofar as legally binding), bye-laws, treaties and other regulatory requirements relevant to either or both of the Service Provider's or the Authority's business, from time to time in force which are or may become applicable to the Services. The Service Provider shall promptly notify the Authority if the Service Provider is required to make any change to the Services for the purposes of complying with its obligations under this Clause 21.1.2;

SCHEDULE 9 – FORM OF COLLATERAL WARRANTY

1.3 shall comply with all the requirements of any Act of Parliament, Statutory Instrument or Order or any other regulation having the force of law or bye-law and all regulatory requirements relevant to the Subcontractor's business and/or the Authority's business from time to time in force which are or may become applicable to the Subcontract Services;

The panel hope the above information provides satisfactory clarification, however if you are dissatisfied with the internal review actions to date please do not hesitate to contact me or alternately you can refer the matter to the independent authority responsible for enforcing the Freedom of Information Act, at the following address:

So, there you have the evidence of what it says in the TfL/SABA contract.

My response to the FoI review letter was:

Subject: FOI-0703-2526 – Failure to Acknowledge Continued Applicability of TfL Railway Byelaws at North Greenwich Station Car Park

Dear Ms Flint,

Thank you for your response to my internal review request. However, I must now escalate this matter further due to the continued failure of TfL to provide a legally coherent answer to a straightforward statutory question.

Your review panel has confirmed that TfL holds no record of any revocation, amendment, or disapplication of the TfL Railway Byelaws 2011 in respect of the North Greenwich Station Car Park. That absence of evidence is not a neutral finding—it is, by legal implication, confirmation that the byelaws remain in force.

TfL’s refusal to explicitly acknowledge this fact is indefensible. The byelaws were made under paragraph 26 of Schedule 11 to the Greater London Authority Act 1999 and confirmed by the Secretary of State. Unless and until they are formally revoked by legal instrument, they continue to apply to the land to which they were originally attached. This is a matter of public law, not contractor discretion.

Your continued references to Saba’s enforcement practices under PoFA are irrelevant and obfuscatory. The issue is not how Saba chooses to enforce parking, but whether the land is subject to statutory control. That question can only be answered by TfL, and your refusal to do so—despite holding no evidence of revocation—amounts to institutional evasion.

I therefore demand the following:

• A formal acknowledgment that, in the absence of any revocation or amendment, the TfL Railway Byelaws 2011 remain in force at North Greenwich Station Car Park;
• Escalation of this matter to the Public and Regulatory Law team for formal legal confirmation;
• An explanation as to why TfL has failed to acknowledge the continued applicability of its own statutory instruments.

Furthermore, I must raise a serious concern regarding TfL’s liability for the actions of its agent, Saba Park Services UK Ltd. Saba is issuing Parking Charge Notices that falsely claim the right to hold registered keepers liable under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. As you are now aware, the land in question is not “relevant land” under PoFA, as it remains subject to the TfL Railway Byelaws 2011. This renders Saba’s use of DVLA keeper data unlawful as they are in breach of their KADOE contract with the DVLA. As the principal, TfL (via TTL Properties Ltd) is jointly and severally liable for this misuse of personal data and for the misrepresentation of legal authority. I reserve the right to escalate this matter to the Information Commissioner’s Office.

If I do not receive a clear and legally sound response within 10 working days, I will escalate this matter to the Information Commissioner’s Office and submit a formal complaint to the TfL Commissioner regarding the failure of TfL to uphold its statutory responsibilities in relation to land governance.

Yours sincerely,

At this point the FoI team gave up and sent the following response:

As this now falls outside of the FOI remit, I am unable to assist you further.  However I have passed your complaint to our Legal team and requested that they correspond with you directly on this matter.

To date, despite repeated requests for a response from "the legal team", nothing has been forthcoming. I get the sense that they gave decided to bunker down with the 'no see, no hear, no speak' principle in the hope it will go away!

Subject: Follow-Up: Legal Referral – North Greenwich Station Car Park Land Status

Dear Ms Flint,

Thank you for your message of 7 July 2025, in which you advised that the matter had been passed to TfL’s Legal team, with a request that they correspond with me directly.

As of today’s date, I have received no response or acknowledgement from anyone within TfL Legal. Given the legal implications of the question — namely, whether land formerly under statutory control by TfL remains subject to the Railway Byelaws 2011 — this ongoing silence is unacceptable.

Please confirm the following without further delay:

1. The name and contact details of the person or department within TfL Legal now responsible for this matter;
2. A realistic timescale for a substantive response.

Should I not receive either a proper legal response or direct contact from TfL Legal within 5 working days, I will escalate the matter via my MP to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman, citing:

• TfL’s continued failure to answer a clear legal status query,
• the absence of any evidence of revocation or amendment of statutory byelaws, and
• administrative obfuscation and delay.

I am not prepared to be left in limbo over such a fundamental issue. Please treat this as a final courtesy request for resolution before formal escalation.

Yours sincerely,

The last I heard from Flinty was:

I have forwarded your email to our Legal team. I am unaware who is dealing with your queries therefore I am unable to advise further I’m afraid.

Go figure!

ChirpyChicken

doubledotcom said:

I'd be more than happy to do that. Trouble for me is that TfL don't range as far as Liverpool. I was still trying to find a station near me that is still trying to issue Penalty Notices within range.

What about Merseyrail?

daveyjp

Half_way said:

Curious to see if this will resolve issues around clamping on railway land/related land such as at Nottingham s(or /and Manchester's as well as other) tram networks

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2025/nov/25/small-print-on-signs-at-a-tram-park-and-ride-hid-the-fact-i-could-get-clamped