DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 112749--------------------------------------------------
Re: EURO CAR PARK OVERSTAY SHELL PETROL STATION
DIR By: Mocede28
Date: March 10, 2026, 2:45 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you so much intercity125.
The complaint has been submitted. I understand formal complaint
will not change the outcome. What are the next steps for me now
while waiting for complaint response.
#Post#: 112752--------------------------------------------------
Re: EURO CAR PARK OVERSTAY SHELL PETROL STATION
DIR By: InterCity125
Date: March 10, 2026, 3:48 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
A formal complaint will not change the outcome but an admission
that the complaint was mishandled and, that PoFA keeper
liability was wrongly established by the Assessor when the NtK
was non-compliant, is, tantamount, to the same thing.
#Post#: 114235--------------------------------------------------
Re: EURO CAR PARK OVERSTAY SHELL PETROL STATION
DIR By: Mocede28
Date: March 24, 2026, 10:54 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Copy pasted email received from POPLA today.
Thank you for your email received 10 March 2026, outlining the
reasons why you are unhappy with the decision that has been
reached by the assessor in your appeal. This was passed to me by
the POPLA team as I am responsible for investigating complaints.
It is worth pointing out that before submitting an appeal, our
website informs appellants that POPLA is a one-stage appeal
service, and we cannot reconsider your appeal if you disagree
with our decision.
The crux of your complaint is that the assessor has incorrectly
applied the Protection of Freedoms Act (POFA) 2012 when
assessing your appeal.
In order for a parking operator to transfer liability of the
parking charge to the registered keeper when the driver has not
been identified, it must meet the strict requirements pf
Schedule 4 of POFA.
POFA confirms the notice must be sent with the relevant times
and contain the statutory wording:
The Notice to Keeper was issued on 19 November 2025, six days
after the parking event on 13 November 2025 and therefore it was
sent on the statutory time frame.
The Notice also states the keeper must either provide the full
name and address of the driver and pass the notice to them. The
notice confirms further if after the period of 28 days beginning
the day after that on which the notice is given, the parking
charge has not been paid in full and the operator does not know
the name and address of the driver, it has the right to receive
any unpaid part of the paring charge from the appellant as the
registered keeper:
Therefore, on reviewing the notice to keeper, I agree with the
assessor that the operator has met the strict requirements of
POFA in transferring liability of the charge to you as the
registered keeper.
You state the assessor specifically mentions noncompliance with
Paragraph 9(2)(e) in the summary at the start of the response.
On reviewing the assessor’s decision, I not the appellant has
referenced this when detailing your grounds of appeal. This
comment is not the assessor stating the notice is not compliant
rather it is a bullet point summary of one of your grounds of
appeal.
Having reviewed both the appeal and your complaint, I am
satisfied the decision reached is appropriate based on the
evidence presented.
I am sorry that your experience of using our service has not
been positive. However, POPLA’s involvement in your appeal has
now ended and this response concludes our complaints process. It
will not be appropriate for us to correspond further on this
matter, and all further correspondence will be noted on your
case but not responded to.
You are of course, free to pursue this matter further, through
other means, such as the Courts. For independent legal advice,
please contact Citizens Advice at: www.citizensadvice.org.uk or
call 0345 404 05 06 (English) or 0345 404 0505 (Welsh).
Yours sincerely,
Paul Garrity
POPLA Complaints
#Post#: 114240--------------------------------------------------
Re: EURO CAR PARK OVERSTAY SHELL PETROL STATION
DIR By: InterCity125
Date: March 24, 2026, 11:44 am
---------------------------------------------------------
More embarrassment for POPLA.
Reply with the following;
Dear Paul,
Thank you for your reply.
Having examined your response I can see that you have 'skipped
over' the missing wording and two limbed legal choice required
by Schedule 4 Paragraph 9(2)(e).
Is this wording and two limbed legal choice not required to make
the notice compliant?
Paragraph 9(2)(e) specifies;
THE NOTICE MUST STATE that the creditor does not know both the
name of the driver and a current address for service for the
driver - Please point this wording out to me as I simply cannot
find it on the operators NtK?
9(2)(e)(i) and 9(2)(e)(ii) also specifies that the notice MUST
set out the prescribed wording AND;
Invite the keeper;
to pay the unpaid parking charges
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 the notice on to the driver;
Please point this two limbed legal invitation out to me?
In your response you state, "The Notice also states the keeper
must EITHER provide the full name and address of the driver and
pass the notice to them." - This makes no grammatical sense
since the second limb of your logic is missing?? - It's seems
like you were actually half way to subconsciously demonstrating
non-compliance there?
Of course, the notice must state that the keeper may EITHER pay
the unpaid charges OR provide alternative driver details?
The invitation to 'pay the unpaid parking charges' is clearly
missing and you appear to notice that fact and this is why your
sentence changes course half way through? Oddly, and having
noticed it, you don't comment on the missing part of the
mandatory two limbed choice? - To be clear, this missing limb
makes the notice non compliant?
Any how, please specifically set out term 9(2)(e) / 9(2)(e)(i) /
9(2)(e)(ii) and then demonstrate how the wording from the NtK
satisfies each of those requirements.
As I said, at present your reply carefully skips over these
requirements.
So, to start with, we are looking for the prescribed sentence
which states, "the creditor does not know both the name of the
driver and a current address for service for the driver"?
Remember, look at the requirements of 9(2)(e) - The notice MUST
STATE that the creditor does not know both the name of the
driver and a current address for service for the driver.
Does the notice STATE this wording or not? It doesn't. If it did
then either you or Gayle Stanton would have already pointed the
wording out by now?
I await your reply.
Best wishes,
xxxxxx xxxxxxxxx
#Post#: 115508--------------------------------------------------
Re: EURO CAR PARK OVERSTAY SHELL PETROL STATION
DIR By: Mocede28
Date: April 10, 2026, 5:04 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for your email received 28 March 2026 in regards to
POPLA appeal:
I can see from the email chain that my colleague has already
responded to your complaint and provided his findings after a
full review and was satisfied the PCN met the requirements of
PoFA 2012.
My colleague advised you that his response marks the end of our
complaints procedure, and it will not be appropriate for POPLA
to respond further.
I must further reiterate that our complaints process is now
closed, and we will not be entering into any further discussion
about the decision. For clarity, any further correspondence
received in relation to this issue will be noted, however we
will not be responding.
Yours sincerely,
Amy Smith
POPLA Complaints Team
#Post#: 115530--------------------------------------------------
Re: EURO CAR PARK OVERSTAY SHELL PETROL STATION
DIR By: Mocede28
Date: April 10, 2026, 8:52 am
---------------------------------------------------------
You cant even correct them once they make a mistake.
#Post#: 115651--------------------------------------------------
Re: EURO CAR PARK OVERSTAY SHELL PETROL STATION
DIR By: Mocede28
Date: April 12, 2026, 2:57 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks all for your help.
Do I now wait for ECP to write to me again requesting for
payment after POPLA appeal has closed in operators favour?
I recall b789 saying ECP will take me to court and that’s where
I will have much higher chance of winning.
#Post#: 115666--------------------------------------------------
Re: EURO CAR PARK OVERSTAY SHELL PETROL STATION
DIR By: InterCity125
Date: April 13, 2026, 1:22 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Next thing to look out for is a Letter Before Claim.
There will be begging debt letters in the meantime which can
safely be ignored.
*****************************************************
Page 5 of 5
DIR Previous Page