10-12-2026, 12:08 PM
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:
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:
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.
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.
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:
Quote: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.
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience. - Mark Twain
