DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 123347--------------------------------------------------
Re: EuroCarParks PCN - Two characters wrong on parking payment
DIR By: InterCity125
Date: June 30, 2026, 2:57 am
---------------------------------------------------------
You could contact Octopus and ask them to record the fact that
you are now dealing with the matter and that no payment should
be made by them in relation to your vehicle.
Given that the operator has now issued the NtH, it would
probably be too late for them to allege that the keeper had not
provided them with the correct documents - if they believed that
the keeper had not provided the correct documents then they
should have raised that point directly with the keeper (lease
company) before issuing the NtH.
#Post#: 126941--------------------------------------------------
Re: EuroCarParks PCN - Two characters wrong on parking payment
DIR By: Curliness8852
Date: August 5, 2026, 11:17 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I have now received a response to my appeal, stating that they
are offering a "Major Keying Error" fine of £20 instead of the
full fine.
As they did not follow due process in issuing the fine, should I
still appeal to POPLA on the basis that they haven't fulfilled
their NtH obligations?
If I do appeal on this basis, am I best to avoid muddying the
waters by talking about the fact that a ticket was bought with a
major keying error, and just stick to the invalid NtH line
entirely?
Thanks
#Post#: 126942--------------------------------------------------
Re: EuroCarParks PCN - Two characters wrong on parking payment
DIR By: jfollows
Date: August 5, 2026, 11:30 am
---------------------------------------------------------
It’s your call.
--- Quote ---
> You can appeal on the basis of a “keying error”, see
HTML https://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/AOS/Sector%20Code%20Templates/sectorsingleCodeofPracticeVersion1.1130426-2.pdf,<br
/>and ask to pay accordingly per F.3.
>
> Or you can post the notice here and see if there are grounds
for appealing it and paying nothing.
>
>
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/
--- End Quote ---
Do you want to pay £0 but have to deal with this for a number of
months, or do you want to be done with thi for £20 now?
Only you can decide.
#Post#: 126946--------------------------------------------------
Re: EuroCarParks PCN - Two characters wrong on parking payment
DIR By: Curliness8852
Date: August 5, 2026, 11:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I am happy to drag through an appeal since parking was paid for
in full.
The options listed on POPLA are:
- My vehicle was stolen
- I was not improperly parked
- The amount requested on the parking charge is not correct
- I was not the driver or the registered keeper of the vehicle
at the time of the alleged improper parking
- Extreme circumstances prevented me from parking correctly
- Other
The most appropriate option seems to be "Other", but they add a
statement saying Appeals based solely on the following grounds
(the last two) are less likely to be successful.
As such, would I be best to select both "I was not improperly
parked" (and provide evidence of payment) and "Other" to cover
both options?
#Post#: 126975--------------------------------------------------
Re: EuroCarParks PCN - Two characters wrong on parking payment
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: August 5, 2026, 4:54 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Just choose "other". "I was not improperly parked" at the very
least implies who was driving, which, given one of your appeal
points is based on them not knowing who was driving, is not
advised.
#Post#: 127232--------------------------------------------------
Re: EuroCarParks PCN - Two characters wrong on parking payment
DIR By: Curliness8852
Date: August 8, 2026, 6:20 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I have drafted an appeal letter, below. I have deliberately left
out the keying error and other information that could "muddy the
waters", as I don't want to cause confusion to the appeals
assessor.
Would you mind reviewing the below and telling if there is
anything that I have omitted that would boost the appeal though?
--- Quote ---
> I write to appeal the Parking Charge Notice (reference XXXX)
issued by Euro Car Parks Limited (“the operator”). I appeal
solely in my capacity as hirer of the vehicle. I do not identify
the driver.
> Grounds of Appeal: Failure to comply with the statutory
requirements for a valid Notice to Hirer under Schedule 4,
Paragraph 14 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.
> For a Notice to Hirer (“NtH”) to be valid and capable of
transferring liability to the hirer, the operator must comply
strictly with the conditions set out in Schedule 4, Paragraph 14
of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (“PoFA 2012”).
> Paragraph 14(2)(a) requires that the creditor has given the
hirer a notice together with a copy of the Notice to Keeper and
a copy of the documents mentioned in paragraph 13(2). These are:
> •
to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to
a named person under a hire agreement;
> •
> •
that hire agreement.
> Upon receiving the NtH from the operator, I noted that none of
the abovementioned documents were enclosed – neither the Notice
to Keeper, hire agreement, or any communications from the hire
company. To date, none of these documents have been provided at
any point, whether at the time of service of the NtH or
subsequently. The operator has therefore failed entirely to
satisfy the statutory conditions necessary to transfer liability
from the keeper to the hirer.
> The operator’s failure to provide the requisite documents
means that no valid NtH exists in law. Liability therefore
cannot be transferred to me as the hirer, and the charge is thus
not enforceable against me.
> For completeness, I note that even if the documents had been
provided at a later date, this would still not cure the
deficiency: Paragraph 14(2)(a) requires the documents to be
served together with the NtH, and retrospective provision cannot
satisfy that requirement.
> I respectfully request that POPLA uphold this appeal and
cancel the charge in full.
> Supporting Documents Enclosed:
> 1.
>
--- End Quote ---
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 2
DIR Previous Page