DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 75130--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye PCN sent to old address even though DVLA had
updated address and driver has new licence - can it be igno
DIR By: Ahead4life
Date: June 6, 2025, 8:50 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I am about to submit the appeal and the only attachment is the
Letter of Consent, other than that, it is exactly the wording
above. Out of interest, if the appeal is rejected by POPLA, what
can be done next? Is there another avenue? At the end of the
day, I am all in with seeing this through as I am sick to death
of these awful companies hounding law abiding, busy, ordinary
people who are just going about their day trying to scrape a
living and get on, with threatening, misleading demands for
ridiculously huge amounts of money for 'crime' of parking in
their car park. If we lose, so be it, it will have cost time and
a fine that I can't imagine is much more than what they demand
anyway. Again, thank you so much for the expertise and hand
holding. Shall I just press go or is there anything else I can
add in to the appeal that occurs to anyone?
#Post#: 75167--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye PCN sent to old address even though DVLA had
updated address and driver has new licence - can it be igno
DIR By: b789
Date: June 6, 2025, 11:34 am
---------------------------------------------------------
If the POPLA appeal is unsuccessful, then the decision is not
binding on you. You don't pay the invoice.
It will likely go as far as a court claim but the odds of it
actually ever reaching hearing are very slim with the outcome
usually being a strike out or a discontinuation. We will advise
on every step of the way.
#Post#: 75196--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye PCN sent to old address even though DVLA had
updated address and driver has new licence - can it be igno
DIR By: Ahead4life
Date: June 6, 2025, 4:03 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Submitted! Will keep you up to date when I hear and thanks
again.
#Post#: 77182--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye PCN sent to old address even though DVLA had
updated address and driver has new licence - can it be igno
DIR By: Ahead4life
Date: June 19, 2025, 9:05 am
---------------------------------------------------------
HI there, I have had the dreaded response from Popla asking for
responses to the Operators response to the appeal. Parking eye's
response is 33 pages long! Shows all the Max 1.5 hr Parking
Signs on a map of the MacDonalds site, copies of all
correspondence between us including Privacy request,
Authorisation for me to act on sons behalf etc etc.
Obviously I don't want to dump 33 pages of this on here as it is
a repeat of all the emails I have sent, and their responses
along with the POPLA process I needed to follow.
The POPLA appeal gives me 1 week to provide comments on the
Operators response, which is basically everything they have
already sent and saying signs were there, the notice was sent,
the acknowledgement of change of address on V5 forms sorted, me
being the contact was confirmed etc etc.
I would be enormously grateful for help in how to 'respond to
the operator' with my comments which must be in by 26th June.
Let me know if you needs to see any of the documents.
#Post#: 77211--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye PCN sent to old address even though DVLA had
updated address and driver has new licence - can it be igno
DIR By: b789
Date: June 19, 2025, 12:26 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Just go through their evidence pack and note anything they have
not either rebutted or responded to in your appeal. Also, if
there is anything in their evidence pack that is new or you can
rebut, do so.
There are plenty of POPLA appeals on the forum with operator
evidence responses, just adapt one of those if necessary.
#Post#: 77292--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye PCN sent to old address even though DVLA had
updated address and driver has new licence - can it be igno
DIR By: Ahead4life
Date: June 20, 2025, 2:10 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I can't see anything new as such, just going on about how clear
the signage is and the vehicle had headlights on in the photo
and therefore should have seen the 'ample signage' about 1.5 hr
parking max stay.
Feeling somewhat overwhelmed and panicked about how to best
manage the response to this.
This is what ParkingEye have written, along with supporting
documents which include photos of car entering and exiting and a
map of the MacDonalds car park pointing out the signage which
does apparently show there are several signs but apart from the
entrance one, as far as I know, all small and it was dark, not
daylight.
Do I just restate what I sent in the appeal?
The ParkingEye response includes all correspondence with dates,
the notices, map of the site with signs highlighted, but no
reference to any of the 'human stuff' like the disability being
raised, sent to wrong address, it was the middle of the night,
dark, no other cars in the car park, just dates.
This was what ParkingEye included as a covering note in their
response:
Financial Current Value £100.00 Outstanding £100.00 Paid To Date
£0.00
Photographs In Out Case History
01/04/2025 Date of event System check/manual check identified
breach of terms and conditions, prior to DVLA request
03/04/2025 Request queued to DVLA for keeper details
04/04/2025 DVLA response received - Success (Legislation Used:
POFA_POPLA - Issued To: Keeper)
04/04/2025 Parking Charge Letter Issued - Letter1 - Ltr01-210
13/04/2025 Parking Charge Letter Issued - Letter2 - Ltr02-210
15/04/2025 Letter Issued - Website Appeal Response
15/04/2025 Website Appeal received for this case and is queued
for processing. 02/05/2025 Letter Issued - GDPR Request - With
Appeal
02/05/2025 Letter Issued - Driver Details Required From Keeper
POFA
02/06/2025 Letter Issued - **Unsuccessful POPLA - Pro-Active
Rules and Conditions This site is a 1½ hour maximum stay
customer car park as clearly stated on the signage (enclosed).
1½ hour max stay. No return within 1 hour. Blue Badge holders –
all terms & conditions apply. Park within marked bays No parking
on yellow lines/hatched areas We have included a signage plan
showing that there are signs situated at the entrance, exit and
throughout the car park displaying the terms and conditions of
the site. Authority
We can confirm that the above site is on private land, is not
council owned and that we have written authority to operate and
issue Parking Charge Notices at this site from the landowner (or
landowner’s agent).
It must also be noted that any person who makes a contract in
his own name without disclosing the existence of a principal, or
who, though disclosing the fact that he is acting as an agent on
behalf of a principal, renders himself personally liable on the
contract, is entitled to enforce it against the other
contracting party. (Fairlie v Fenton (1870) LR 5 Exch 169).
It follows that a lawful contract between ourselves and the
motorist will be enforceable by us as a party to that contract.
Additional Information The BPA has provided clarity to both
motorists and parking management companies regarding grace
periods which can be found in the Private Parking Single Code of
Practice.
www.britishparking.co.uk/code-of-practice-and-compliance-monitoring
Parkingeye are fully compliant with the Private Parking Sector
Single Code of Practice in relation to Grace Periods.
Parkingeye use Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) cameras
and not CCTV cameras to monitor car parks. This technology
captures and photographs vehicles entering and exiting the car
park and compares this data to the maximum stay that vehicles
are entitled to and, where applicable, any payment or permit
that may relate to the registration captured.
We ensure that all our signage is clear, ample, and in keeping
with the Private Parking Sector Single Code of Practice
regulations. The signage at this site demonstrates adequate
colour contrast between the text and the backgrounds advised in
the Private Parking Sector Single Code of Practice. As the
images show, the vehicle had its headlights on. This would have
rendered the many signs in the car park visible.
Please note, our website appeals portal now asks the appellant
to confirm that all supporting evidence relating to the Parking
Charge has been attached. This confirmation is displayed in the
website appeal document included in this evidence pack. Our ANPR
records confirm the vehicle remained in the car park. The car
park name, along with the entry and exit times can be found on
the parking charge notice.
We have included further records of the vehicle’s movements
recorded on the date of the event. Whitelist Lookup –
Whitelist Name Plate Description Start Date/Time End Date/Time
Input Date/Time Duration No results The above system extract
displays all permits, payments for parking, and terminal entries
relating to the vehicle on the date of the parking event.
Please note, if no results are displayed, this confirms that no
permit, payment, or terminal entries were recorded. Inbound,
Outbound Correspondence and Car Park Signage . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
#Post#: 77338--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye PCN sent to old address even though DVLA had
updated address and driver has new licence - can it be igno
DIR By: b789
Date: June 20, 2025, 6:01 am
---------------------------------------------------------
It's just a POPLA appeal. Stop panicking! Even unsuccessful, it
has no bearing on anything going forwards.
Use this as your response:
--- Quote ---
> The operator’s evidence pack fails to address multiple key
points raised in the original appeal.
>
> 1. PoFA non-compliance – The operator has not rebutted or even
acknowledged the deficiencies identified in the Notice to
Keeper, including the absence of the required invitation to the
keeper under paragraph 9(2)(e)(i), and the incorrect wording
under 9(2)(f). They have simply repeated that the notice was
issued to the keeper using PoFA without demonstrating actual
compliance.
>
> 2. Notice not ‘given’ within 14 days – The operator ignores
the fact that the notice was not received at the keeper’s
address due to redirection, and has provided no proof of actual
delivery. Under paragraph 9(6) of PoFA, the presumption of
service is rebuttable, and it has been rebutted in this case. No
response has been made to this challenge.
>
> 3. Signage – The operator asserts that signage is ‘ample’ and
‘compliant’ but provides no night-time images to prove that it
was visible and legible at 10:40pm when the driver entered. They
have not rebutted the specific point that there were no clear
instructions visible to the driver regarding payment or
registration after dark.
>
> 4. Equality Act 2010 – The operator has entirely failed to
engage with or even mention the disability disclosure made
during the appeal, nor have they acknowledged that a Letter of
Authority was submitted and accepted. This omission is serious.
They were on notice that a vulnerable person was involved and
took no steps to consider reasonable adjustments or exercise
discretion. This is a breach of their statutory duties under the
Equality Act 2010.
>
> 5. Driver not identified – The operator has made no attempt to
argue that the driver has been identified and has relied solely
on keeper liability. Since they cannot rely on PoFA due to the
defects in the notice and failure to comply with time limits, no
liability can pass to the keeper.
>
> 6. Landowner authority – The operator refers to having
“written authority” but has not provided any contemporaneous,
unredacted landowner contract. A vague assertion of authority is
insufficient to establish standing to issue or enforce charges.
>
> In short, the operator has provided a generic evidence bundle
that ignores every material point raised in the appeal. No
attempt has been made to engage with the facts or legal
arguments. The appeal should be allowed.
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 77469--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye PCN sent to old address even though DVLA had
updated address and driver has new licence - can it be igno
DIR By: Ahead4life
Date: June 21, 2025, 2:10 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you, thank you. I have now submitted that and will keep
the forum posted. It is so easy to get blindsided and panicked
by the amount of wording, documents and so called 'evidence'
they produce. I know it is all to overwhelm and encourage you to
'cave' and just pay the money to make it go away.
I have stepped back, taken a moment, reminded myself that it is
all about these awful companies making easy money off the back
of people going about their day, who have simply overstayed or
not spotted a parking fee sign.
Your help is once again hugely appreciated.
#Post#: 83977--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye PCN sent to old address even though DVLA had
updated address and driver has new licence - can it be igno
DIR By: Ahead4life
Date: August 4, 2025, 3:29 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hello all.
I have had the outcome from POPLA come through regarding the
Appeal on this and..... IT WAS SUCCESSFUL!
Thank you so much for all the guidance and help.
The statement from POPLA was long, so I am just sharing the last
paragraph as that encapsulates what this was about and should
help fellow 'fighters' I hope with their own cases as it
explains why they rejected the Operators reasoning and upheld
our appeal
"Ultimately, it is the operator's responsibility to ensure the
signage is readable and understandable at all times, including
during the hours of darkness, early morning or at dusk, and the
evidence provided to me does not prove this. It is in the
operator's gift to provide all the relevant photographic
evidence in their evidence pack to prove their case and in this
instance they have not. I therefore feel that the PCN was not
issued incorrectly and allow the appeal. In conclusion, I do not
feel that the PCN has been issued correctly for the reasons
outlined above. I can see that the appellant has referenced
other points within their appeal to POPLA, but I do not feel
that these need to be reviewed based on the outcome reached."
Again, thank you so much for all the assistance and lets hope I
won't need to be on here again for a while!
#Post#: 83979--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye PCN sent to old address even though DVLA had
updated address and driver has new licence - can it be igno
DIR By: Ahead4life
Date: August 4, 2025, 3:40 am
---------------------------------------------------------
This may also be helpful for people on here to read as this was
what the POPLA Assessor outlined as a summary of the case:
"The appellant has provided a detailed account of events. For
the purpose of my report, I have summarised the grounds into the
following points and have checked each point before coming to my
conclusion. The appellant says that: 1. Non-compliance with PoFA
2012 – paragraphs 9(2)(e)(i) and 9(2)(f). 2. Notice not ‘given’
within 14 days. 3. Unclear and insufficient signage in the dark.
4. Failure to consider Equality Act 2010 obligations. 5. Driver
not identified – Keeper liability not established. 6. No
evidence of landowner authority. The appellant reiterated their
version of events in the motorist’s comments section. Assessor
summary of reasons"
It just gives a useful overview that I hope others on here can
benefit from. Thanks again!
*****************************************************
Page 7 of 8
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page