POPLA appeal refused on railway land - claiming keeper liability

cfq1718

Hello,

My car was parked at a railway car park on one occasion without buying a ticket. I have appealed as I was not the driver and I don't believe that I can be held liable as keeper on railway land.

It went to POPLA and they have refused my appeal.

The appellant has appealed on the basis that the operator has failed to establish Keeper Liability as the charge was issued at Sidcup railway station and it is subject to statutory control under Railway Byelaws and cannot create Keeper Liability in civil proceedings. They state that under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 keeper liability only applies on relevant land. They also state that the operator cannot transfer liability to the keeper as they are the registered keeper and not the driver and they decline to identify the driver. They also state that as the operator has provided no evidence as to identify the driver there is no lawful presumption that the registered keeper is the driver as such liability cannot be established. The appellant has mentioned that as the registered keeper they did not enter any contract with the operator, and they did not agree to any parking terms and as they were not the driver no contractual liability exists. I acknowledge the appellants comments about the operator failing to establish Keeper Liability as the railway station is subject to statutory control under railway byelaws. However, this car park is on private Railway owned land and it operates under Private Land Legislation which the operator has made statement of. This means that land which is covered by Railway Byelaws is now relevant land so parking operators can now use Protection of Freedoms Act and issue parking charges. The Private Parking Sector Single Code of Practice (The Code) sets the standards its parking operators need to comply with. The Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA) 2012 is a law that allows parking operators to transfer the liability to the registered keeper in the event that the driver or hirer is not identified. In December 2025 the wording within the Protection of Freedoms Act (2012) has been updated as follows: 2. At the end of paragraph 3(4) of Schedule 4 to the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 insert ‘’but not byelaws made under section 219 of the Transport Act 2000(2) by the Strategic Rail Authority, confirmed under Schedule 20 of the Transport Act 2000 and preserved by section 46(4) of the Railways Act 2005(3)’’. Parking operators have to follow certain rules including warning the registered keeper that they will be liable if the parking operator is not provided with the name and address of the driver. In this case, the PCN in question has the necessary information and the parking operator has therefore successfully transferred the liability onto the registered keeper. While I acknowledge that the appellant states that they did not agree to the parking terms and conditions as they were not the driver, so no contract was formed. The signs on the car park clearly displayed the terms and conditions so I am therefore satisfied that a valid contract was formed with the driver and as the Notice to Keeper complies with the requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, liability for the breach has been transferred to the registered keeper; the appellant is correctly held liable for the Parking Charge. After considering the evidence from both parties, the vehicle remained on the carpark without valid payment and therefore did not comply with the terms and conditions of the site. As such, I am satisfied the parking charge has been issued correctly and I must refuse the appeal.

Should I let them take me to court ? I have absolutely no interest in paying their invoice.

Gr1pr

Who is they. ?

When was the incident date. ? This year ? Or before BOXING DAY 2025 ?

yarpsnehpets

Incident date is critical.

The law change was not retrospective, meaning; that if the alleged contravention was before 26th Dec 2025 then PoFA cannot apply.

Also, it will depend which railway operator owns the site since it is not a blanket exclusion.

cfq1718

It was in March 2026 and the operator is Southeastern.

Gr1pr

Then its relevant land ( Sidcup train station. ) and has been since BOXING Day 2025, as pointed out by popla

Which parking company issued the pcn. ?

cfq1718

APCOA but I don't think I'll pay it anyway.

yarpsnehpets

Can you post up the PCN? Cover only personal data.

ChirpyChicken

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82037159#Comment_82037159

correct never pay them

ChirpyChicken

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82037196#Comment_82037196

No need its a POFA notice

cfq1718

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82037196#Comment_82037196

I flushed it down the toilet months ago after using it in there.

I have no time for companies that send dozens of threatening letters with big red letters (TV licensing included). Dartford crossing do it right - if it's the first time you've forgotten to pay, they let you just pay the crossing charge.

Coupon-mad

Definitely ignore APCOA but you should have asked here first and not tried an outdated appeal. We would have told you about the Boxing Day 2025 POFA legislative amendment about Railway land.

You couldn't have won this at POPLA.

Just ignore the threatograms.