PCN at location never attended

[Calg]

This case concerns a Parking Charge Notice (private parking firm) issued by Close Unit Protection Services Ltd, relating to an alleged contravention on Wednesday, 22 April 2026. The notice itself is dated Monday, 24 August 2026, and I first became aware of it via received initial notice.

The notice appears to have been issued as By post (ANPR/camera). Driver identified status: NO. Equality Act considerations: No. The location is stated as 70 - 72 High Street Aveley, Essex, RM15 4BX.

A preliminary Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA) assessment indicates NON_COMPLIANT: Likely outside PoFA paragraph 9 timing window. Route applied: PoFA paragraph 9 (postal NtK, no windscreen NtD). The notice is treated as given on Wednesday, 26 August 2026 (126 days after the alleged event). On this basis, keeper liability may not be established.

Current stage:
- Notice responded to: Yes
- Debt recovery letters: No
- Letter of Claim: No
- County Court claim: No

Response/appeal already sent (verbatim where possible):

Hello,

I received this Parking Charge Notice today, with notice date of 24/08/2026.
I attempted to appeal via the online form but it would not allow me to proceed.

The notice claims my vehicle was at 70 - 72 High Street Aveley, Essex, RM15 4BX at roughly 19:30pm on the 22th April 2026.
This is simply not possible - I have never travelled to Aveley, I also have records from my Google Maps tracking that show at that exact time I was nowhere near the vicinity of Aveley.

I'm uncertain if this is a fraudulent scam letter or a mistake in your systems.
I did receive a legitimate parking charge notice from you around this timeframe but my records show this was paid in full in May, at a reduced value of £60.
Additionally it was not from 70-72 High Street Aveley.

Please kindly inform me if this is not a genuine parking charge notice. If you believe it to be correct I can provide evidence that I was never at the above location.

Kind Regards

--------------------------------

Hello,

Following up on this again as I've not had a response to my email.
I did receive another notice today to which I called up again but was not able to resolve on the phone.
The receptionist said she would forward my details so I'm just sending another nudge in case the email was lost.

Regards

------------------------------

Response from CUP:

Hi <Name>

Thank you for your email regarding PCN Reference 327208

Please be advised that the Notice to Keeper (NTK) was issued on August 24, 2026, giving you 28 days to submit a formal appeal. As this period has now elapsed, the opportunity to challenge the notice has expired.

The NTK clearly outlined the process for submitting a valid appeal:

"You can pay or appeal this notice, you cannot do both. If you’d like to appeal this ParkingCharge Notice, you must do so within 28 days (beginning with the day after that on which this notice is given)"

Unfortunately, we are unable to reopen the appeal process once the designated timeframe has passed.

The Parking Charge Notice therefore remains payable. Failure to pay the amount may result in further costs being incurred and may also result in CUP Enforcement, reluctantly instructing a Debt Collection Agency to collect any sum due.

At this stage, we consider this matter closed and will not enter into further correspondence on this issue.

Any additional emails regarding the same matter may not receive a response.

Please arrange for payment to be made promptly to avoid further action.

Please refer to the link below to direct your payment.

https://cupenforcement.ec6pay.com/

Please note that you can also make a payment via telephone through the automated payment line- 0333 023 011

Best wishes,
CUP Enforcement

Additional notes provided:
I was never at the stated location, I have never been to the stated location nor anywhere within a few miles of the vicinity.

I have google tracking that shows I was somewhere else at that exact time. Albeit tracking data from my partner and not myself.

I attempted to contact CUP 4 times in the period, twice on the phone and twice on email. They were unable to help on the phone and ignored my emails until a week after the appeal period ended telling me that I could no longer appeal despite having already done so.

In a panic I generated an AI "legal-sounding" response which I somewhat regret now knowing about this forum.

Please can I have advice on the strongest next steps and defence points for this case.

---

As mentioned in my initial post in a panic I generated an AI response (don't lynch me please!) in hopes it would scare them off, but I was directed here after seeking advice elsewhere.
I also received a "Final Demand" letter today, dated 6th October.

Here is the AI response for visibility 

Dear CUP Enforcement,
Re: PCN *** / Vehicle ***
I formally dispute this parking charge in full.
Having further reviewed the Notice to Keeper, there are significant issues concerning both the alleged parking event and the validity of the Notice to Keeper.
1. Notice to Keeper issued 124 days after the alleged event
Your notice states:
Contravention date: 22/04/2026
Notice date: 24/08/2026
The notice is therefore dated approximately 124 days after the alleged parking event.
The notice expressly identifies itself as a "Parking Charge Notice to Registered Keeper" and purports to rely upon registered keeper liability.
If you are seeking to rely upon Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 to recover the charge from me as registered keeper, please explain how the Notice to Keeper complies with the applicable statutory timing requirements.
In particular, if this was a parking event detected remotely and no Notice to Driver was affixed to the vehicle, please explain how a Notice to Keeper dated 24 August 2026 can satisfy the requirement in paragraph 9 of Schedule 4 for the notice to be given within the prescribed period following the parking event.
If you contend that a Notice to Driver was issued on 22 April 2026, please provide a copy of that Notice to Driver and explain how the Notice to Keeper dated 24 August 2026 complies with paragraph 8 of Schedule 4.
For the avoidance of doubt, I do not admit that I was the driver.
2. The alleged parking event did not occur as alleged
I was not at 70–72 High Street, Aveley on 22 April 2026 at the alleged time.
I have Google Maps location history showing my location at the relevant time and will preserve this evidence for any subsequent appeal or proceedings.
I therefore require you to provide the complete photographic/ANPR evidence relied upon in issuing PCN 327208, including the original timestamps.
3. Possible duplication / incorrect photographic evidence
I previously received a separate parking charge from CUP which I paid earlier in the year.
The photographs supplied with this PCN appear substantially similar to photographs associated with that earlier matter.
I therefore require you to investigate whether the photographs and/or ANPR record associated with PCN 327208 have been incorrectly duplicated from another parking event or otherwise associated with the wrong parking charge.
Please preserve the original photographic and ANPR records for both matters.
4. My appeal was submitted within the permitted period
I attempted to submit an appeal through your online system shortly after receiving the Notice to Keeper.
The online appeal system would not allow me to proceed.
I then telephoned your office and explained the problem. I was advised by your receptionist that the issue could not be resolved over the telephone and that I should submit the appeal by email.
I followed that instruction and sent my substantive appeal to info@cupenforcement.com on 28 August 2026, only four days after the Notice to Keeper dated 24 August 2026.
That email clearly disputed the alleged parking event and explained that I had evidence showing that I was elsewhere.
I then followed up on 24 September 2026 after receiving a further notice and having received no response.
I have now received your response approximately five weeks after my original appeal, stating that the appeal period has expired.
I do not accept that position.
I attempted to appeal within the prescribed period, encountered a technical failure with your online system, followed the alternative procedure provided to me by your employee, and then waited for CUP to process my correspondence.
I therefore require CUP to reinstate and consider my appeal.
5. Information requested
Please provide:
The complete original ANPR/CCTV photographs relied upon for PCN 327208.
The exact date and time each image was captured.
The complete alleged period of parking.
Confirmation of whether a Notice to Driver was issued on 22 April 2026 and, if so, a copy.
The date CUP obtained my registered keeper details from the DVLA.
Confirmation of whether CUP relies upon Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 for keeper liability.
The evidence relied upon to establish that the vehicle was at the stated location.
Confirmation that the photographic evidence has been checked against the separate PCN which I paid in May 2026.
Confirmation that all ANPR records, photographs, audit logs and correspondence relating to this PCN have been preserved.
I also request that this email is treated as a formal complaint concerning the handling of my attempted appeal.
I note that the BPA's current Code of Practice requires operators to have an appeals process and to consider appeals submitted outside the normal 28-day period where exceptional circumstances prevented the appeal being submitted within the normal timeframe.
The circumstances here are clear: I attempted to appeal within four days, your online system prevented me from doing so, your employee directed me to submit the appeal by email, and CUP then failed to respond to that appeal for approximately five weeks.
I therefore require the appeal to be reinstated and considered on its merits.
If CUP refuses to do so, please provide your final complaint response and the POPLA verification code so that I can refer the matter to the independent appeals service.
I do not accept liability for this charge and I do not consent to this dispute being treated as resolved merely because CUP has declined to respond to the substantive issues raised.
Kind regards,

[b789]

Welcome to the forum @Calg. First and foremost, under no circumstances must you ever, ever, ever identify the driver. Any response is solely as the Keeper of the vehicle. There is absolutely no legal obligation on the Keeper to ever identify the driver to an unregulated private parking firm.

I have reviewed what you have already sent CUP, including your AI-generated response. Thankfully, despite all that unnecessary correspondence, I cannot see where you have actually identified the driver. Keep it that way!

The operator has no idea of the identity of the driver unless the Keeper divulges it. As they do not know the identity of the driver, the ONLY way they can hold the Keeper liable is if their PCN is fully (100%) compliant with Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA).

It isn't. Not even close!

The alleged contravention was on 22 April 2026. The Notice to Keeper (NtK) was not even issued until 24 August 2026, some four months later.

Under paragraph 9(4) of Schedule 4 PoFA, the NtK must be given (delivered) within the relevant period of 14 days. CUP has missed that statutory deadline by months. Consequently, there can be no Keeper liability.

That point alone should have killed this immediately. You didn't need a lengthy AI-generated legal argument or to prove where you were.

However, your insistence that the vehicle was never at the alleged location raises an entirely separate issue. Either CUP's ANPR system has misread a registration, the images have been incorrectly attributed to your vehicle, or there is some other problem that needs investigating.

I suggest you now:

1. Submit a Subject Access Request (SAR) to CUP's Data Protection Officer, requiring all photographs, ANPR records, original timestamps and personal data associated with this PCN. We need to see precisely what they have recorded.
2. Preserve all your correspondence, including your original email appeal sent on 28 August. CUP's subsequent assertion that your appeal was out of time is demonstrably wrong and provides grounds for a formal complaint to the BPA.
3. Preserve any evidence establishing where the vehicle actually was at the relevant time. Your partner's Google location history is only useful if it can genuinely establish the vehicle's whereabouts.

Do not send CUP any more lengthy explanations or disclose anything about the identity of the driver.

You can safely ignore all the debt recovery letters and use them as lining for a cat litter tray, for all anyone cares. Debt collectors are simply powerless to do anything except to intimidate the low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree into paying out of ignorance and fear. They have no enforcement powers.

However, do not ignore a formal Letter of Claim or an actual County Court claim. Those require a proper response.

For now, you have an exceptionally strong position on the Keeper liability issue alone. CUP's failure to comply with PoFA cannot be retrospectively corrected.

The priority is to obtain their photographic evidence and establish why they are alleging that your vehicle was somewhere you insist it never was.

Can you please post images of the Notice to Keeper (NtK) if you have it (both sides). Also, douybe check whether it relates to the earlier one you say you paid. (Next time please come here first and save the money.)

Use the following for your SAR:

To the Data Protection Officer,

I am the registered keeper of the vehicle associated with PCN 327208, concerning an alleged parking event on 22 April 2026 at 70–72 High Street, Aveley, Essex, RM15 4BX.

This is a formal Subject Access Request (SAR) under Article 15 of the UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR).

I require copies of all personal data held by Close Unit Protection Services Ltd, trading as CUP Enforcement, relating to me and the above PCN, including:

1. Photographic and ANPR evidence: All original photographs, ANPR captures and CCTV images associated with the alleged event, at their original available resolution, including timestamps, recorded vehicle registration marks and associated metadata.
2. ANPR processing records: All retained ANPR recognition results, manual verification records, corrections, audit trails and internal records showing how the vehicle registration was identified and associated with this PCN.
3. DVLA enquiries: All personal data and records relating to the acquisition of my registered keeper details from the DVLA, including the date of the enquiry and information received.
4. PCN records: All records, notes, correspondence and personal data associated with the issue, processing and subsequent enforcement of PCN 327208.
5. Appeal correspondence: Copies of all emails received from my email address, particularly my original appeal submitted on 28 August 2026 and my follow-up of 24 September 2026. This includes any retained email receipt logs, timestamps, internal forwarding records, case notes and records of decisions concerning those communications.
6. Telephone records: All retained records, notes and recordings of telephone communications concerning this PCN.
7. Previous PCN: All personal data relating to the earlier, separate parking charge issued to the same registered keeper and paid in May 2026, including the associated photographs and vehicle identification records.
8. Third-party disclosures: Details of any third parties to whom my personal data has been disclosed in connection with this PCN, including debt recovery agents, together with copies of the personal data disclosed.
9. Other personal data: Any additional personal data concerning me held in your systems, including internal correspondence, case-management records and relevant data-processing records.

Please preserve all relevant original photographs, ANPR records, metadata, audit logs, correspondence and other associated data, as the accuracy of the alleged parking event and the processing of my personal data are disputed.

This request is made solely in my capacity as the registered keeper and data subject. No admission is made regarding the identity of the driver.

Please provide the requested information electronically by reply to this email.

Under Article 12(3) UK GDPR, you are required to respond without undue delay and, ordinarily, within one calendar month of receiving this request.

Please acknowledge receipt.

Yours faithfully,

[Full name]

[Vehicle registration]

[Postal address]

Important: Send this from the same email address used for the original appeal (info@cupenforcement.com), retain the sent email and any acknowledgement.

Do not enclose any additional identification documents with your SAR. CUP already has your name, address and vehicle registration from the DVLA, together with your PCN reference and previous correspondence. There is no justification for demanding further identification. If CUP attempts to insist on it, particularly as a means of delaying its response, bring that back here before providing anything.

The SAR is a separate statutory data protection request, not another parking appeal. CUP cannot refuse to process it merely because it considers the appeal period to have expired.

[Calg]

Thanks so much, this is all very helpful and reassuring!

Can you please post images of the Notice to Keeper (NtK) if you have it (both sides). Also, douybe check whether it relates to the earlier one you say you paid. (Next time please come here first and save the money.)

Here are images of all documents received regarding this PCN. Unfortunately I didn't keep any correspondence from my previous incident, but thanks, I know better now!  

https://ibb.co/PzWD8NtC (front)
https://ibb.co/zhR16Kkr (back)
https://ibb.co/4Rg65D0h (reminder)
https://ibb.co/S4vrGM3b (final demand)

[b789]

@Calg, thanks for providing the images.

For future reference, it is only the original Notice to Keeper (NtK), both front and back, that I need to see. The subsequent reminders and Final Demands contain nothing of any legal significance and can safely be ignored. They do not alter the legal position.

What is particularly interesting is that CUP has not even attempted to invoke Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) in its original NtK.

As previously explained, the operator has no idea who the driver was unless someone tells them. Without that information, the only statutory route to holding the registered Keeper liable is full compliance with PoFA.

CUP has not attempted to use that route and, in any event, the NtK was issued more than four months after the alleged event, making PoFA compliance impossible.

There is no Keeper liability. End of story.

There is no need to engage with their reminders or debt recovery demands. The only correspondence requiring attention would be a formal Letter of Claim or an actual County Court claim.

For now, the only useful next step is the SAR, so we can establish precisely what their ANPR system recorded and why they are alleging that your vehicle was at a location you insist it never visited.

And remember, under no circumstances identify the driver. Any correspondence must remain strictly in your capacity as the registered Keeper.

[Calg]

Thanks @b789! I've sent the SAR email as instructed and once I have that information from them I will report back.

Much appreciate your effort here and the work you do for others. Thanks so much!