DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 58779--------------------------------------------------
Euro Car Parks - PCN for overstaying Sainsburys Penn Inn
DIR By: amis66
Date: February 18, 2025, 1:30 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
We have received a PCN from Euro Car Parks following a visit to
McDonalds drive through next to the Sainsburys cars park. After
collecting the order the car exited the McDonalds area and moved
into the Sainsburys area to take a phone call.
We've visited McDonalds and Sainsburys many times and wasn't
aware of any parking restrictions. On the day of the
contravention it was late at night and dark. We visited after
receiving the letter at a similar time and saved the dashcam
footage to show that the car park is dark and there is no lit
signage.
The images in the letter are very dark and I haven't redacted
the entry image that is what it looks like!
We don't believe that the signage is sufficient to comply with
the BPA code of conduct but would like some guidance about
appeal to Euro Car Parks in the first instance, how much do we
say?
HTML https://i.imgur.com/ZgsvH8x.png
HTML https://i.imgur.com/QXoStor.jpeg
HTML https://i.imgur.com/ymmTjpp.jpeg
HTML https://i.imgur.com/aSlMJbA.jpeg
HTML https://i.imgur.com/nYb17tX.jpeg
HTML https://i.imgur.com/qHeSeEv.jpeg
HTML https://i.imgur.com/DminpBn.jpeg
#Post#: 58796--------------------------------------------------
Re: Euro Car Parks - PCN for overstaying Sainsburys Penn Inn
DIR By: b789
Date: February 18, 2025, 2:55 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The Notice to Keeper (NtK) is not fully compliant with PoFA and
it also breaches the BPA/IPC Private Parking Single Code of
Conduct (PPSCoP), meaning it has been issued wrongly. However,
as they will reject any initial appeal, save your other
arguments for a POPLA appeal.
No one who is here receiving our advice and following it pays a
penny to ECP. For now, just deal with as follows:
As long as the unknown drivers identity is not revealed. There
is no legal obligation on the known keeper (the recipient of the
Notice to Keeper (NtK)) to reveal the identity of the unknown
driver and no inference or assumptions can be made.
The NtK is not compliant with all the requirements of PoFA which
means that if the unknown driver is not identified, they cannot
transfer liability for the charge from the unknown driver to the
known keeper.
Use the following as your appeal. No need to embellish or remove
anything from it:
--- Quote ---
> I am the keeper of the vehicle and I dispute your 'parking
charge'. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I
will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your
client landowner.
>
> As your Notice to Keeper (NtK) does not fully comply with ALL
the requirements of PoFA 2012, you are unable to hold the keeper
of the vehicle liable for the charge. Partial or even
substantial compliance is not sufficient. There will be no
admission as to who was driving and no inference or assumptions
can be drawn. ECP has relied on contract law allegations of
breach against the driver only.
>
> The registered keeper cannot be presumed or inferred to have
been the driver, nor pursued under some twisted interpretation
of the law of agency. Your NtK can only hold the driver liable.
ECP have no hope at POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a
complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 59068--------------------------------------------------
Re: Euro Car Parks - PCN for overstaying Sainsburys Penn Inn
DIR By: amis66
Date: February 20, 2025, 12:34 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
b789 thank you so much for your reply. My expectation was that
no matter what I stated ECP would refuse the appeal.
I notice that page two of the NTK didn't appear in my original
post so I've posted it here, does that make any difference to it
being POFA compliant?
Just so I can understand would you mind explaining what makes it
non compliant?
I will so follow your advice, I went through this process nearly
ten years ago for another PCN at Asda in Newquay it took 18
months but with the advice of a forum like this we won a POPLA
appeal ;D
HTML https://i.imgur.com/yKYlGfh.jpeg
#Post#: 59082--------------------------------------------------
Re: Euro Car Parks - PCN for overstaying Sainsburys Penn Inn
DIR By: b789
Date: February 20, 2025, 1:38 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
It breaches PoFA 9(2)(e)(i) which invalidates Keeper liability.
PoFA 9(2)(e)(i) requires the Notice to Keeper to explicitly
invite the keeper to either pay the charge or provide the
driver’s details. This requirement cannot be implied simply
because the notice is addressed to the keeper. The wording must
clearly establish the keeper’s liability if the driver is not
identified.
In this case, the notice states that the driver is liable for
the charge, and all references to payment are directed at the
driver. Without the required invitation for the keeper to pay,
the NtK has not fully complied with all the statutory
requirements of PoFA. The operator has not demonstrated that
liability has been properly transferred to the keeper.
#Post#: 59237--------------------------------------------------
Re: Euro Car Parks - PCN for overstaying Sainsburys Penn Inn
DIR By: amis66
Date: February 21, 2025, 3:57 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for taking the time for explaining.
ECP only allow appeals via post or via their website where the
online form doesn't give enough characters to post the response
provided in full!
The full response is 892 character but the online form is only
allowing 800 characters.
So stupid question time ??? should I appeal via post and hope
Royal Mail manage to deliver by the deadline or reduce the
response by 92 characters and appeal online?
#Post#: 59260--------------------------------------------------
Re: Euro Car Parks - PCN for overstaying Sainsburys Penn Inn
DIR By: b789
Date: February 21, 2025, 10:14 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
You can upload your appeal as a pdf here:
HTML https://www.eurocarparks.com/enquiry
#Post#: 59263--------------------------------------------------
Re: Euro Car Parks - PCN for overstaying Sainsburys Penn
Innprivate parking
DIR By: ixxy
Date: February 22, 2025, 2:17 am
---------------------------------------------------------
PoFA 9(2)(e)(i) requires the Notice to Keeper to explicitly
invite the keeper to either pay the charge or provide the
driver’s details.
This is b789s interpretation of POFA and would seem to
invalidate pretty much every PCN issued regardless of which
company issued it. It's an extremely technical point which has
yet to be tested in court. Also seems odd that the entire
parking industry have invalidated their ntks over such a simple
ommission of the word invite.
It might be a valid interpretation of the POFA legislation but
it will need a court to decide that. Please don't assume this is
a slam dunk defence, it ie extremely likely to be rejected by
the parking company appeals process and the independent appeals
process. Are you willing to go all the way through the court
process on an untested defence?
The lack of lighting in the carpark won't be a defence, your car
does have two extremely bright lights on it.
#Post#: 59266--------------------------------------------------
Re: Euro Car Parks - PCN for overstaying Sainsburys Penn Inn
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: February 22, 2025, 2:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote ---
> The lack of lighting in the carpark won't be a defence, your
car does have two extremely bright lights on it.
--- End Quote ---
It might be if, combined with the placement of the signage, it
rendered the signage difficult to spot and/or properly read.
Unless the signage was unusual low down, or the driver was
driving about with his full beams on, his Car headlights are
unlikely to have illuminated the terms and conditions signage.
#Post#: 59267--------------------------------------------------
Re: Euro Car Parks - PCN for overstaying Sainsburys Penn Inn
DIR By: ixxy
Date: February 22, 2025, 3:44 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Ok that's fair, there can be conditions where lack of lighting
could be a contributing factor and some of the PPC signage is
terrible, however given reasonable signage positioning it should
be visible with dipped headlights. Signs on the highway are
usually more than 2m off the ground and they aren't all lit, for
example speed limit repeater signs in a 40 zone. In this case
the sign at the entrance to the car park should be prominent and
visible which should be enough to encourage the driver to look
for T & C signs. If the signage is not visible at night it's
probably more to do with inadequate quantity and sign design
rather than the fact they aren't lit.
We see enough people who never read the signs even on the
brightest of days.
#Post#: 59273--------------------------------------------------
Re: Euro Car Parks - PCN for overstaying Sainsburys Penn Inn
DIR By: amis66
Date: February 22, 2025, 4:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: b789 link ---
>
> You can upload your appeal as a pdf here:
>
>
HTML https://www.eurocarparks.com/enquiry
>
--- End Quote ---
Thanks, I looked at that page and it clearly states that they do
not accept appeals via that web form.
--- Quote from: DWMB2 link ---
>
> [quote] The lack of lighting in the carpark won't be a
defence, your car does have two extremely bright lights on it.
--- End Quote ---
It might be if, combined with the placement of the signage, it
rendered the signage difficult to spot and/or properly read.
Unless the signage was unusual low down, or the driver was
driving about with his full beams on, his Car headlights are
unlikely to have illuminated the terms and conditions signage.
[/quote]
Yes the headlights might have illuminated the signs had there
been any, if you look at the photo's I posted there isn't any
signs high , low or otherwise!
As for talk of courts we are well away from that point! I simply
want to appeal to ECP and then move on the POPLA.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page