DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 100786--------------------------------------------------
Eurocarparks PCN - Overstayed Time Limit - Sainsbury’s Balham -
Final Notification Letter
DIR By: Ronnos
Date: December 2, 2025, 6:03 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hello all, and thanks kindly for taking the time to read.
I received a final notification letter I include in the links
below. This is my first correspondence I have received about the
supposed contravention, and this was received in the post on 1st
December.
HTML https://ibb.co/cSgD6X2S
HTML https://ibb.co/4cbv4Sq
I am the registered keeper of said vehicle and in possession of
the V5C.
The car is registered for use by a disabled individual, in
possession of a blue badge. It would appear the driver was
delayed in leaving during a shopping trip due to difficulties
encountered on the day, which lead to the driver exceeding the
maximum parking period.
I currently haven’t any photos of the car park signage to
provide, however here at its co ordinates
HTML https://www.google.com/maps/place/Sainsbury's,+147-151+Balham+High+Rd,+London+SW12+9AU/@51.44427,-0.15192,16z/data=!4m6!3m5!1s0x487605c5373852b7:0x47b6899a2774d1fb!8m2!3d51.44427!4d-0.15192!16s%2Fg%2F1tfdcyjn?utm_campaign=ml-svfp&g_ep=Eg1tbF8yMDI1MTExOV8wIOC7DCoASAJQAg%3D%3D
I am unsure as to how to proceed given this is a final
notification received so very late, and there has been no prior
warning to this.
Any and all help would be greatly appreciated
Thanks in advance for your time
#Post#: 100913--------------------------------------------------
Re: Eurocarparks PCN - Overstayed Time Limit - Sainsbury’s
Balham - Final Notification Letter
DIR By: b789
Date: December 3, 2025, 12:39 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
A final reminder is useless for us to advise on. However,
suffice it to say, if you receive a county court claim issued by
DCB Legal, as long as you defend it with the advice you get
here, then you will not be paying penny to ECP.
AS we have no idea of the alleged contravention or the dates, I
suggest you try an initial appeal. 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 ---
In the meantime do a forum search for any of the other multitude
of ECP PCNs and read how they are handled and eventually
discontinued.
#Post#: 107275--------------------------------------------------
Re: Eurocarparks PCN - Overstayed Time Limit - Sainsbury’s
Balham - Final Notification Letter
DIR By: Ronnos
Date: January 24, 2026, 6:20 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hello everyone again, and thanks in advance for taking the time
to read,
[member=26]b789[/member], I followed your instructions and
submitted the appeal. This has now been rejected, and I have
received the following document.
Page 01 -
HTML https://ibb.co/Kz2xWs6Z
Page 02 -
HTML https://ibb.co/Ps6M8qpp
Page 03 -
HTML https://ibb.co/DfXtfPfp
Frustratingly, this was received as junk via email, and nothing
has been received in the post. I only came across it earlier
this evening, so I apologise for posting this so close to the
POPLA appeal deadline.
I have still not received the original PCN, but nor have I
requested a copy of it.
So currently, I have a few questions as to how to proceed.
1. I have gone through the forum, and could probably put
together a POPLA appeal based on Keeper liability having not
been established, but are there any other points I could add,
without having the contents of the PCN to work with?
2. The vehicle in question has a blue badge registered to it. It
could well be the original overstay was due to a disabled
persons complications. Should I explore this in any way for
POPLA? Or is this now mostly irrelevant unless I was to travel
to the Sainsburys in question to ask for and hope they cancel
this charge?
3. Given all I have read on this forum, as well as the fact I
have no PCN to work with… should I even bother with POPLA if, I
am assuming, I am pursuing a court claim for this? If I don’t
appeal, this will occur sooner, and in turn, this will all end
quicker, no? Or is a Popla appeal key to discontinuance later
down the line?
Thanks again all for your time and advice, it is all greatly
appreciated.
#Post#: 107292--------------------------------------------------
Re: Eurocarparks PCN - Overstayed Time Limit - Sainsbury’s
Balham - Final Notification Letter
DIR By: ixxy
Date: January 25, 2026, 6:14 am
---------------------------------------------------------
You need to send them a subject access request to get a copy of
the original PCN.
If you are appealing to POPLA on the grounds the PCN was not
fully compliant with POFA it will most likely fail, this is a
delaying tactic on the part of the keeper when no better appeal
grounds exist and may only be a valid defence if it ever gets to
court but I don't think we've ever seen a case won on that
argument.
Were there extenuating circumstances that meant the disabled
driver was unable to comply with the car park rules as they were
presented, as in did the rules discriminate against a disabled
person. Taking too long to get back to the car park normally
doesn't count unless there was some form of medical emergency.
An example of a valid appeal would be not having a long enough
grace period to allow a disabled person to return to their car
having paid at a payment machine on exit in a paid car park. If
there were grounds, failing to include that in your initial
appeal was a mistake, how did the PPC know the driver was
disabled, if you didn't tell them how could they make reasonable
adjustments (cancel the PCN) if they didn't know. If you are
going to use the disabled driver as an appeal issue you will
need to be able to clearly explain to the POPLA assessor why the
issues encountered were related to the car park management and
discriminated against the driver. Having a blue badge on it's
own counts for nothing.
As for appealing to POPLA it does show you've engaged with
process in good faith if it ever gets to court but it probably
won't make much difference. You're not pursuing a court claim,
the PPC may decide to issue a court claim against you, the ball
is in their court, you are just a passenger in this process
until court proceedings start.
It would have been worth contacting Sainsbury's in the first
place, they may have just got it cancelled at the mention of
disability, nothing stopping you trying that route now.
#Post#: 107318--------------------------------------------------
Re: Eurocarparks PCN - Overstayed Time Limit - Sainsbury’s
Balham - Final Notification Letter
DIR By: Ronnos
Date: January 25, 2026, 1:47 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=4074]ixxy[/member] Thank you and I appreciate your
reply.
So to confirm, I would need to send Eurocarparks a subject
access request for the original PCN? Would this be something I
mention in my POPLA appeal that I have not received / am waiting
for?
Regarding the disability badge, as I was not the driver, I do
not know what the circumstances were. It was not something I was
made aware of until in recent days, so I would presume it would
be best to avoid moving forward with talking about this at all?
This is also why I never spoke to Sainsbury's about this.
I will move forward with the POPLA appeal so that I show I am
engaging with the process. Whether my arguments have any
grounds, I guess I will wait and see :)
Any other advice by anyone would be greatly appreciated, but if
there is none, I will endeavour to update this once I hear back
from POPLA.
Thanks again all
#Post#: 107546--------------------------------------------------
Re: Eurocarparks PCN - Overstayed Time Limit - Sainsbury’s
Balham - Final Notification Letter
DIR By: Ronnos
Date: January 27, 2026, 12:20 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi everyone, and thanks again for your time and efforts,
Although I understand ultimately, a POPLA appeal is unlikely to
yield any positive results, I provide my draft appeal which I
intend to send through tonight.
I have identified some previous appeals I think are most
relevant to my case, and altered their content to better reflect
my situation.
Hopefully, it's good to go as is:
-----
I am the registered keeper of vehicle xxxxxxx and I dispute the
above-referenced Parking Charge. The NtK is not compliant with
all the requirements of PoFA which means that they cannot
transfer liability for the charge to the keeper. I therefore
dispute the charge on the following grounds:
1. Non-Compliance with the Protection of Freedoms Act (POFA)
2. No evidence of parking
3. No evidence of landholder authority
1. Non-Compliance with POFA
Schedule 4 paragraph 9(2) is binary (“MUST” means all or
nothing) and this NtK omits the mandatory invitation to the
keeper to pay under 9(2)(e)(i)
Schedule 4 paragraph 9(2) does not say the notice should include
certain things. It says: “The notice must — (a)… (b)… (c)… (d)…
(e)… (f)… (g)… (h)… (i)…”. “Must” is compulsory. PoFA 9(2) is a
statutory gateway to keeper liability: either every required
element is present or the gateway never opens. There is no such
thing as “partial” or even “substantial compliance” with 9(2).
Like pregnancy, it is binary: a notice is either PoFA-compliant
or it is not. If one required limb is missing, the operator
cannot use PoFA to pursue the keeper. End of.
Here the missing limb is 9(2)(e)(i). That sub-paragraph requires
the NtK to invite the keeper to pay the unpaid parking charges.
The law is explicit that the invitation must be directed to “the
keeper”. It is not enough to tell “the driver” to pay; it must
invite “the keeper” to pay if the creditor wants keeper
liability.
What this NtK actually does is talk only to “the driver” when
demanding payment, and nowhere invites “the keeper” to pay. The
demand section of the NtK is framed in driver terms (e.g.
language such as “the driver is required to pay within 28 days”
/ “payment is due from the driver”), and there is no sentence
that invites “the keeper” to pay the unpaid parking charges. The
word “keeper” (if used at all) appears only in neutral
data/disclosure paragraphs or generic definitions, not in any
invitation to pay. That omission is precisely what 9(2)(e)(i)
forbids.
For the avoidance of doubt, 9(2)(e) contains two limbs: (i) an
invitation to the keeper to pay, and (ii) an invitation to
either identify and serve the driver and to pass the notice to
the driver. Even setting aside 9(2)(e)(ii), the absence of the
9(2)(e)(i) keeper-payment invitation alone is fatal to PoFA
compliance. The statute makes keeper liability contingent on
strict satisfaction of every “must” in 9(2). Where a notice
invites only “the driver” to pay, it fails 9(2)(e)(i), so it is
not a PoFA notice. The operator therefore cannot transfer
liability from an unidentified driver to the registered keeper.
Only the driver could ever be liable; the driver is not
identified. The keeper is not liable in law.
2. No evidence of parking
Having not received a PCN at all, only a Final Notification
Letter, EuroCarParks have failed to provide photos of the
vehicle, together with time stamps, as evidence of entering and
leaving the site on the alleged date of contravention.
I require full unredacted copies of photographs of the vehicle
entering and leaving the site which conform to Section 7.3 of
the COP. Without these, we only have ECP’s word that an
infringement has potentially been committed.
3. No evidence of Landowner authority
The operator is also put to strict proof, by means of
contemporaneous and unredacted evidence, of a chain of authority
flowing from the landowner of the "relevant land" to the
operator. It is not accepted that the operator has adhered to
the landowner’s definitions, exemptions, grace period, hours of
operation, etc. and any instructions to cancel charges due to
complaints nor that both the landowner and operator are in full
compliance with planning permission granted against a Traffic
Management Plan.
Section 14 of the COP defines the mandatory requirements and I
put this operator to strict proof of full compliance. As this
operator does not have proprietary interest in the “relevant
land” then I require that they produce an unredacted copy of the
contract with the landowner, to prove that they have the right
to enforce the charge in court in their own name
I therefore respectfully request that this PCN be cancelled.
-----
#Post#: 110238--------------------------------------------------
Re: Eurocarparks PCN - Overstayed Time Limit - Sainsbury’s
Balham - Final Notification Letter
DIR By: Ronnos
Date: February 18, 2026, 11:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
A quick update,
I have received a message from POPLA stating action is required.
Eurocarparks have uploaded their evidence in a 37 page document,
including a complete communication trail, photos of the car park
etc.
I am being given 7 days to add any comments starting from 17th
February.
Interestingly, the original PCN has been included here, a
redacted copy of which I provide in the below link.
PCN Front -
HTML https://ibb.co/pvSTgqHT
PCN Back -
HTML https://ibb.co/8DFhS2Pn
Is there any action I should take at this moment? Or simply
allow this to proceed as is?
Thanks again
#Post#: 110271--------------------------------------------------
Re: Eurocarparks PCN - Overstayed Time Limit - Sainsbury’s
Balham - Final Notification Letter
DIR By: InterCity125
Date: February 19, 2026, 1:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Comments on Euro Car Parks evidence.
Once again the operator asserts that the NtK is PoFA compliant
when it is not.
In order to be compliant the NtK must contain specific text and
legal choices as specified by Schedule 4 of PoFA.
In this instance, the requirements of Schedule 4 Paragraph
9(2)(e) are not satisfied by the operators NtK.
To be compliant, the requirements of 9(2)(e) can only be met if
a specific paragraph is placed in the NtK which should read as
follows;
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 required paragraph is clearly missing from the operators
NtK.
The information must be presented in this manner to be compliant
ie in one paragraph. Compliance cannot be achieved by, for
example, placing the information at random points throughout the
NtK since this would not present the keeper with the legal
choice which 9(2)(e) requires.
The Euro Car Parks NtK never states the mandatory wording
required by para. 9(2)(e).
The Euro Car Parks NtK never 'invites the keeper to pay the
unpaid parking charges'.
The Euro Car Parks NtK never presents the two limbed legal
invitation which para. 9(2)(e)(i) and 9(2)(e)(ii) requires.
If the required mandatory wording and subsequent legal choice is
present on the NtK then, I would ask that either Euro Car Parks
or the POPLA assessor point out the required statutory wording?
In order to rely on PoFA, all requirements of Schedule 4
Paragraph 9(2) must be met - the wording is not subjective, it
is 100% objective in nature.
The missing wording is immediately fatal to the operators case.
#Post#: 110873--------------------------------------------------
Re: Eurocarparks PCN - Overstayed Time Limit - Sainsbury’s
Balham - Final Notification Letter
DIR By: Ronnos
Date: February 23, 2026, 7:21 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi InterCity125, and thanks so much for the response,
It's interesting to see how the NTK doesn't appear compliant,
yet they continue to send them out anyway...
While I understand and appreciate a response to Popla will be
unlikely yield a successful appeal, I will respond with what you
have written.
Shall I adapt it and shorten it? Or just copy as is and send it
through?
Thanks again all for your time and help
#Post#: 110882--------------------------------------------------
Re: Eurocarparks PCN - Overstayed Time Limit - Sainsbury’s
Balham - Final Notification Letter
DIR By: InterCity125
Date: February 24, 2026, 1:56 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Just copy it directly.
I am expecting this POPLA appeal to be successful.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 3
DIR Next Page