Gatwick - Times Parking

4eyesman

any charities you support? otherwise, ill pick one! again, appreciate all the help.

Coupon-mad

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82043780#Comment_82043780

We regulars are happy if you pick a charity to make a donation. And well done!

🙂

4eyesman

no problem, rest assured itll be done. thank you all again.

RanjanaSakti

Subject: Times24 Gatwick North Terminal Drop-Off – IAS appeal advice

Hi everyone,

I'd really appreciate a sense check before I submit an IAS appeal.

This concerns a Times24 Parking Charge Notice for the Gatwick Airport North Terminal Drop-Off Zone.

Timeline:

• Alleged event: 18 June 2026
• Notice to Keeper dated 7 July 2026
• I did not receive the Notice to Keeper until 15 July 2026.
• I appealed only as the registered keeper and did not identify the driver.
• In my appeal, I asked Times24:
  • whether they were relying on Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012;
  • whether they considered the location to be "relevant land";
  • the legal basis for keeper liability; and
  • the evidence they intended to rely upon if rejecting the appeal.
• Instead of answering those questions, they asked me to provide the photo ID section of my driving licence.
• I declined because I was appealing solely as the registered keeper and had not identified the driver.
• Times24 then rejected my appeal because I did not provide the requested evidence.

My proposed IAS appeal focuses on the following points:

1. The driver has never been identified.
2. Times24 has not established a lawful basis for pursuing the registered keeper.
3. If Times24 relies on Schedule 4 of POFA, it should prove that all statutory conditions are met, including that the location is "relevant land".
4. Times24 failed to answer the legal questions raised in my appeal and instead focused on requesting my driving licence.

I'm not asserting that the land definitely is or is not relevant land. My position is simply that, if the operator wishes to rely on keeper liability under POFA, the burden is on them to establish that the statutory requirements are satisfied.

I'd be grateful for any comments before I submit the IAS appeal. Have I focused on the strongest arguments, or is there anything I should add, remove or reword?

Thanks in advance.

Coupon-mad

"I'm not asserting that the land definitely is or is not relevant land."

You should, or the IAS will say you didn't provide any proof!

DaiBricks

Help needed please!

I have received a Parking Charge to Keeper from Times Parking.

Incident 13.06.2026

Letter sent 27.07.2026

Site was Liverpool Moorfields Corner.

Photographic evidence states that the car entered the car park 13.06.2026 at 14:19 and exited at 14:31 without paying. Unfortunately the driver was unable to download the app to pay for parking and returned to the car and went and parked in a different car park around the corner.

Whilst the incident is correct, to receive a Parking Charge of £100, reduced to £60 if paid within 28 days is daylight robbery.

Your help on appealing this would be much appreciated, better still, get this charge dismissed.

Thank you in advance.

Umkomaas

New thread of your own please. You will get personal bespoke help there.

ChirpyChicken

just an FYI @Coupon-mad Times have now got the IAS/IPC Bug and are now saying this in their appeal replies for Gawick

In the absence of driver
details, we rely on the principles considered in Elliott v Loake (1982) when assessing, on the balance of probabilities, who was driving

I wonder where they learned this from……

deb567

I have received this today from them :-

The ICO and the IPC are both aware us asking for photographic ID to support an appeal when the customer states they are not the ones driving.  This is because requesting the ID is in line with the data protection principles. Comparing the photographs are necessary and proportionate in order to achieve our aim of ensuring compliance with the terms and conditions.We have considered alternative options however none are successful at achieving the same aim.
We can confirm that the copy of photographic ID will only be used for the purpose of supporting your appeal, will be kept in a secure location and will be deleted inline with our retention policies
You have reached the end of our internal appeals procedure, Times24 UK Limited will not assess further appeals in relation to this matter.However, in line with our Accredited Trade Association (ATA) membership we are required to provide you with an Independent Appeals Service. If you believe this decision is incorrect, you are entitled to appeal to the Independent Appeals Service (IAS) provided by International Parking Community (IPC).If you choose to appeal to the IAS you will lose the ability to pay the charge at the reduced rate and the full amount will apply.
In order to appeal, you will need your Parking Charge number and your Vehicle Registration, which can be found within this letter. Appeals must be submitted to the IAS within 28 days.......blah

deb567

This was following my reply :

Your response confirms that Times24 is not seeking to rely upon Schedule 4

of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and therefore is not pursuing keeper

liability.

As I have already informed you, I was not the driver of the vehicle on the

date in question.

In the absence of keeper liability, the burden rests entirely upon you to

establish, by evidence, the identity of the driver. You have produced no

such evidence.

Your reliance upon Elliott v Loake (1982) is misconceived. That case did not

establish any legal presumption that a registered keeper is the driver of a

vehicle. It concerned a criminal matter in which there was specific evidence

identifying the driver. Your letter identifies no comparable evidence

whatsoever and appears to rely solely upon my status as registered keeper.

At this point you might wish to refer to Excel Parking Services Ltd v Mrs.

Lynzi Evans. Judge: DJ McKay

Claim no: C8DP79CC in the Cardiff Civil Justice Centre.

Legal representative of BW Legal: Mr Singh

Furthermore, in your earlier correspondence you requested that I provide a

copy of my photocard driving licence. I consider that request to be entirely

inappropriate, unnecessary and disproportionate. As I was not the driver, my

driving licence is irrelevant to the issue under dispute and I can see no

lawful basis requiring me to provide such personal identity documentation.

Given that:

You are not relying upon POFA keeper liability;

I have expressly denied being the driver;

You have provided no evidence identifying me as the driver; and

You continue to pursue me regardless,

I consider your continued processing of my personal data to be without

proper justification.

Should you continue to pursue this matter without evidence that I was the

driver, I will submit formal complaints to the relevant bodies, including:

The DVLA, regarding your acquisition and use of my keeper data;

The Information Commissioner's Office, regarding the lawfulness of your

continued processing of my personal data; and

The International Parking Community, regarding your conduct and reliance

upon legal arguments that are unsupported by the facts of this case.

For the avoidance of doubt:

I was not the driver.

I am under no obligation to identify the driver.

I will not provide identity documents that are irrelevant to this matter.

Please now cease processing my personal data, cancel the Parking Charge

Notice and confirm in writing that the matter is closed.

I reserve all rights.