DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 112769--------------------------------------------------
Overstay Premier Park/Planet Ice Solihull, appeal rejected
By: treeent Date: March 10, 2026, 6:19 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Could I kindly request a review ahead of an upcoming appeal to
POPLA.
A NTK was sent for an ANPR-recorded 3h29 parking session where
the driver had prepaid for 3h. The RK sent the following note
to appeal:
--
I am writing to you as the Registered Keeper of the
above-mentioned vehicle to formally dispute the Parking Charge
Notice xxx issued on xx. I dispute your 'parking charge', as the
keeper of the vehicle. I deny any liability or contractual
agreement to your company for the reasons given below.
1. Evidence of Payment & Performance of Contract
The driver of the vehicle acted in good faith and purchased 3
hours of parking. I have attached a bank transaction screenshot
as evidence that a payment of £2 was successfully debited to
Premier Park Ltd on the date of the event. While the ticket
machine failed to produce a physical receipt confirming the VRM
entry, the financial transaction proves that a contract was
entered into and the consideration (payment) was fulfilled.
Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, a contract cannot be deemed
breached simply due to a minor clerical error or a machine’s
failure to issue a receipt, provided the core obligation
(payment) was met.
2. Frustration of Contract: External Obstruction
The ANPR logs indicate a total duration of 3 hours and 29
minutes. However, the driver was physically prevented from
exiting the site at the conclusion of the paid period. Upon
attempting to leave, the vehicle was obstructed by a large
passenger bus which blocked the exit thoroughfare for a
significant duration. This constitutes Frustration of Contract—a
well-established legal principle where an unforeseen external
event prevents a party from performing their contractual
obligations. The driver remained with the vehicle and exited at
the first available opportunity once the obstruction cleared. As
the delay was beyond the driver's control, no breach of terms
occurred.
3. Failure to apply the mandatory grace period (BPA Code of
Practice breach – primary ground)
Premier Park Ltd is a member of the British Parking Association
(BPA) and is bound by The private parking sector single Code of
Practice (v1.1 including Annex B).
Section 5.1 (Consideration Period): Drivers must be allowed a
minimum of 5 minutes to read signs and park.
Section 5.2 (Grace Period): A minimum 10-minute grace period
must be applied after the expiry of paid parking.
The total "overstay" beyond the 3 hours paid is 29 minutes. When
the mandatory 5-minute consideration period and 10-minute grace
period are deducted, the "unaccounted" time is reduced to 14
minutes. This 14-minute window is entirely accounted for by the
exit obstruction mentioned above.
4. ANPR Timestamps Accuracy vs "Period of Parking"
The ANPR cameras record the time of entry and exit at the
boundary of the site, not the period of parking. Time spent
driving through the car park, looking for a space, or waiting
for a bus to clear the exit does not constitute "parking." As
held in VCS v Ward [2024], the time between the camera capture
and the actual act of parking is not chargeable time.
Proposed Resolution
Given that payment was made and the remaining minutes were the
result of an exit obstruction rather than a voluntary overstay,
I request that this charge be cancelled.
However, in the interest of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
and to avoid unnecessary litigation, I am prepared to offer a
nominal administrative fee of £10 to cover the costs of
processing the payment without a receipt record. This offer is
made strictly without prejudice and is intended to settle the
matter proportionately, as the current charge of £100 is an
unenforceable penalty under these specific circumstances.
If you choose to reject this appeal, please provide a POPLA
verification code so that I may escalate this matter. Since your
PCN is a vague template, I will require an explanation of the
allegation and your evidence. The data supplied in response to
this appeal must include the record of payments made at the PDT
machine - showing partial VRNs - and an explanation of the
reason for the PCN, because your Notice does not explain it in
detail. If the allegation involves an alleged overstay of
minutes, your evidence must include the actual grace period
agreed by the landowner. Please note that I will include the
bank statement evidence and details of the exit obstruction in
my submission to POPLA and any further legal proceedings, and I
will be seeking a full dismissal of your charges.
--
Premier Park then responded with:
--
Thank you for your appeal against the above Parking Charge
Notice (PCN). We have carefully considered your appeal, however
on this occasion the appeal has been rejected for the following
reason;
Whilst we note the comments and reason for appeal advising you
made payment, we can confirm that insufficient evidence has been
provided to substantiate your claims. Payment was not made for
your full parking period. The photographic evidence indicates
the length of time the vehicle remained on site; this
information is then cross-referenced with the data from the
payment services.
The vehicle remained on site for a total parking period of 3
hours and 29 minutes, meaning the whole period of parking was
not paid for. By remaining on site, this means you are agreeing
to the advertised terms and can comply with them. As your
vehicle was not authorised to remain on site for the full
duration of stay, we can confirm that this PCN has been issued
correctly.
We have considered this PCN and found that it does not fall
under the category of Annex F the Appeals Charter of the Single
Code of Practice. Therefore, if no further evidence is provided,
we will deem this to be our final decision.
--
Can the RK send the same appeal text to POPLA, or should it
further be tweaked to call out some standard points
(authorisation from landowner, frustration of contract leaving
the car park, ANPR records vs grace period, the PC ignoring
requests for landowner agreed grace period and PDT machine
record of payment, etc.)?
Many thanks in advance!
#Post#: 112777--------------------------------------------------
Re: Overstay Premier Park/Planet Ice Solihull, appeal rejected
By: RichardW Date: March 11, 2026, 2:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Please post up the PCN
#Post#: 113588--------------------------------------------------
Re: Overstay Premier Park/Planet Ice Solihull, appeal rejected
By: treeent Date: March 18, 2026, 4:55 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Here it is
HTML https://ibb.co/BKY7my6W
HTML https://ibb.co/BKY7my6W
[img width=480
height=640]
HTML https://i.ibb.co/JFSbNvp6/IMG-1625.avif[/img]
#Post#: 113591--------------------------------------------------
Re: Overstay Premier Park/Planet Ice Solihull, appeal rejected
By: InterCity125 Date: March 18, 2026, 5:16 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The notice fails to comply with PoFA Schedule 4 Paragraph
9(2)(f) which specifies;
THE NOTICE MUST warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28
days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is
given—
(i)the amount of the unpaid parking charges specified under
paragraph (d) has not been paid in full, and
(ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a
current address for service for the driver,
the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this
Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so
much of that amount as remains unpaid;
The provided NtK fails to warn the driver that, amongst other
things, the parking operator is required to meet 'all applicable
conditions' under Schedule 4 in order to invoke keeper
liability.
The wording above (which is underlined) is clearly not present
in the operators NtK.
This means that the keeper cannot pursued since the notice is
non-compliant.
#Post#: 113606--------------------------------------------------
Re: Overstay Premier Park/Planet Ice Solihull, appeal rejected
By: ixxy Date: March 18, 2026, 7:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
From your proposed appeal.
Point 1 - it's not about good faith, especially at POPLA, it's
about whether the terms of parking were breached resulting in a
properly issued PCN. The driver paid for 3 hours and stayed for
3 hours 29 mins. Terms breached.
Point 2 - this is your strongest point, frustration of contract
is solid grounds for appeal, do you have any evidence of the
obstruction (a photo for example).
Point 3 - Unfortunately your understanding is wrong, in this
situation the grace period is applicable, not the consideration
period, so the grace was probably 10 minutes meaning the
overstay was 19 minutes.
Point 4 - That's not the way ANPR works, the whole period
between entry and exit is classed as 'Parking', I would be very
doubtful if this would sway a POPLA assessor (if it did every
PCN would potentially be open to appeal as the operator has no
way of knowing how long a driver was actually parked for).
I wouldn't bother trying to argue over the wording of the PCN,
POPLA usually just ignore such arguments, the assessors are not
legal trained and will focus on the substance of the appeal and
whether the PCN has been correctly issued. So unless the PCN has
been deemed delivered outside of the 14 day window or there's
clearly no period of parking it's probably not worth challenging
this.
Some advocate throwing every appeal ground at the wall in the
hope something sticks, it rarely does, personally I'd recommend
sticking to clear reasons why the PCN has been incorrectly
issued which in the case is frustration of contract (assuming
the bus did actually block the driver in for over 20 minutes).
You may need evidence of this though.
#Post#: 113611--------------------------------------------------
Re: Overstay Premier Park/Planet Ice Solihull, appeal rejected
By: InterCity125 Date: March 18, 2026, 8:30 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Just to say, I have, over the years, experienced dozens of PCNs
cancelled on incorrect or missing wording under PoFA so I would
always mention that fact as it is often the one fact that is
100% objective in nature and a fact that can be clearly
demonstrated.
I would mention the PoFA issue and expressly invite the operator
to demonstrate that the wording is present by providing a copy
of the NtK with the mandatory warning outlined in a colour of
your choice.
You are effectively setting the operator up to fail.
Once the operator uploads their evidence you can point out the
'failure to rebut' to the Assessor.
Done properly, POPLA rules can be used against the operator so
long as the game is played correctly.
#Post#: 113754--------------------------------------------------
Re: Overstay Premier Park/Planet Ice Solihull, appeal rejected
By: treeent Date: March 19, 2026, 1:19 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=InterCity125 link=topic=10191.msg113611#msg113611
date=1773840615]
I would mention the PoFA issue and expressly invite the operator
to demonstrate that the wording is present by providing a copy
of the NtK with the mandatory warning outlined in a colour of
your choice.
[/quote]
How would the RK do this though, they have already appealed the
operator decision (which was rejected). PP no longer provide a
way to submit any further communication. Their appeals page
says the PCN has already been appealed and the only route
forward is through POPLA. This is quite odd since even their
reply is worded in such a way to appear final only conditional
to no further comeback from RK.
Can the PoFA issue be referred directly to POPLA in the
independent appeal?
#Post#: 113796--------------------------------------------------
Re: Overstay Premier Park/Planet Ice Solihull, appeal rejected
By: InterCity125 Date: March 20, 2026, 2:48 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=treeent link=topic=10191.msg113754#msg113754
date=1773944344]
Can the PoFA issue be referred directly to POPLA in the
independent appeal?
[/quote]
Yes.
*****************************************************