DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 107353--------------------------------------------------
Re: EURO CAR PARK OVERSTAY SHELL PETROL STATION
By: InterCity125 Date: January 26, 2026, 1:54 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Yes, got it to load.
So the NtK is not PoFA compliant - end of.
You could comment with the following;
[font=Georgia]The conditions of PoFA Schedule 4 Paragraph
9(2)(e)(i) are not met - the critically required wording is
obviously not present in the NtK.
The wording of PoFA makes it clear that total compliance with
Para 9(2) is required in order for PoFA to be relied upon. Para
9(1) reinforces that point beyond any doubt.
The conditions set out in Schedule 4 of PoFA are not met simply
by the parking operator stating that they are - close
examination of the NtK is required.
I highlighted the NtK failings in my original appeal - the
operator simply skips over this point and never demonstrates
compliance - their further comments simply demonstrate that they
do not understand the requirements of para. 9(2).
The NtK provided in the operator evidence contains a number of
highlighted areas (in order to seemingly challenge my appeal
evidence) but the highlighting still fails to highlight the
required wording - no amount of highlighting will make the
required wording magically appear.
I challenge the operator / POPLA assessor to specifically show
where the required wording is on the operators NtK?
In order to be compliant, PoFA specifies that the notice 'must'
state all of the information required in para. 9(2) in order for
the parking operator to rely on PoFA - at no point does the
issued notice to keeper 'invite the keeper to pay the unpaid
parking charges' - the absence of this required wording is
immediately fatal to the operators case - therefore the operator
cannot rely on PoFA to transfer liability to the keeper and, as
such, the keeper cannot be pursued as the operator is
suggesting.
By way of help, in order to satisfy the requirements of para.
9(2)(e), the wording on the NtK from the operator MUST contain
wording along the lines of the following;
At the current time, Euro Car Parks (the creditor) does not know
both the name and a current address for service for the driver.
The keeper is therefore INVITED TO PAY THE UNPAID PARKING
CHARGES (Para 9(2)(e)(i) requirement but not present on the
Euro Car Parks NtK)
Or
If the keeper was not the driver of the vehicle, to notify the
creditor of the name of the driver and a current address for
service for the driver and to pass this notice onto the driver
(Para 9(2)(e)(ii) requirement)
The wording of Paragraph 9 (of Schedule 4) means that partial
compliance with Para 9(2) is not sufficient to move liability
onto the keeper using PoFA as the notice 'must' contain all the
stated information from 9(2)(a)to(i). The wording used (must)
means that total compliance is required with each section and
subsection.
Also note that certain sections of para. 9(2) require that the
information is provided in a specific manner - that 9(2)(e)
requires that the information is presented in such a manner as
the keeper is given a specific legal choice between paying the
parking charges themselves OR providing the driver details -
critically, this legal choice is never set out on the operators
NtK as the correct wording from one leg of that choice is never
stated.
It also appears that the parking operator needs to reconsider
their relationship with their solicitors in that respect.
I have also examined the operators signage layout.
The PCN shows the driver entering the forecourt (from the main
road) by making a shallow turn to the left - more of a taper
than a turn in fact - due to the layout, most drivers would
enter in this manner.
The signage on entry from this direction is wholly inadequate
since there is no required 'entry signage' which faces oncoming
traffic - this does not appear to meet the minimum requirements
set out in The Code of Practice document.[/font]
#Post#: 107358--------------------------------------------------
Re: EURO CAR PARK OVERSTAY SHELL PETROL STATION
By: DWMB2 Date: January 26, 2026, 3:41 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=InterCity125 link=topic=8875.msg107353#msg107353
date=1769414096]
So the NtK is not PoFA compliant - end of.
[/quote]
I'd be amazed if the assessor agreed. As of yet, I'm also not
sure we've seen the 9(2)(e)(ii) point tested in court either, so
I'm not sure it's quite right to describe it as "end of". It
might therefore be wise to challenge some other points in ECP's
response.
Do they provide a map of the site anywhere? Their landowner
contract refers to one, but if they've not included one in the
evidence pack that's an issue.
#Post#: 107371--------------------------------------------------
Re: EURO CAR PARK OVERSTAY SHELL PETROL STATION
By: InterCity125 Date: January 26, 2026, 5:46 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I've modified the wording slightly and added a section which
shows complaint wording which I feel adds weight to the appeal.
I cannot open the entire evidence pack so I cannot tell if a map
is present.
#Post#: 107390--------------------------------------------------
Re: EURO CAR PARK OVERSTAY SHELL PETROL STATION
By: Mocede28 Date: January 26, 2026, 7:24 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks inner.
I can confirm dwmb2 there is a map in the evidence pack. I been
trying to deal with imgbb since yesterday but I’m still having
issues. I uploaded 35 page pdf but the link only shows 18 pages.
Here is a link that’s only valid for 24 hours before deletion
that’s shows the last 18 pages with maps and signage.
HTML https://jumpshare.com/s/JC3MfbPkeKM8Zv70029V
#Post#: 107392--------------------------------------------------
Re: EURO CAR PARK OVERSTAY SHELL PETROL STATION
By: DWMB2 Date: January 26, 2026, 8:00 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The images show your vehicle turning left into the car park -
this would have been the driver's view on the way in: Google
Street View
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/oTVTbXPDezSA3nFVA
Their own signage plan support this and shows that the entrance
signage is angled such that it would not be particularly
prominent to a vehicle turning left. I would point this out.
#Post#: 107412--------------------------------------------------
Re: EURO CAR PARK OVERSTAY SHELL PETROL STATION
By: Mocede28 Date: January 26, 2026, 9:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I noted this point early on but didn’t mention it as I thought
it would be disregarded.
You take a left into shell and drive forward to the back passing
fuel pumps on your right. At the back there is plenty of signage
not accessible on google street view. That’s where the courier
collection boxes are.
#Post#: 107418--------------------------------------------------
Re: EURO CAR PARK OVERSTAY SHELL PETROL STATION
By: InterCity125 Date: January 26, 2026, 10:09 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=DWMB2 link=topic=8875.msg107392#msg107392
date=1769436036]
The images show your vehicle turning left into the car park -
this would have been the driver's view on the way in: Google
Street View
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/oTVTbXPDezSA3nFVA
Their own signage plan support this and shows that the entrance
signage is angled such that it would not be particularly
prominent to a vehicle turning left. I would point this out.
[/quote]
Good spot - I have added that to the appeal document.
*****************************************************
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page