DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 108635--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Charge - Overstayed beyond free time - Berkeley
Centre - Sheffield
DIR By: gravers007
Date: February 4, 2026, 12:41 am
---------------------------------------------------------
OK so struggling to get much traction here. I've looked through
the forum and think I've worked out the next steps
1. Appeal to POPLA, using a similar appeal to the one to the
parking company
2. Thar appeal will likely fail. If so then ignore debt
collectors
3. Wait till I get a letter of claim then post that on here.
4. Use template defence provided and the parking company will
likely discontinue to avoid a court fee.
Is this the standard course of event so people in my situation?
If so is it worth adding these details to a sticky post?
#Post#: 108636--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Charge - Overstayed beyond free time - Berkeley
Centre - Sheffield
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: February 4, 2026, 1:30 am
---------------------------------------------------------
If you show us a draft POPLA appeal we can offer feedback. It
should generally be a bit more thorough than the initial appeal
- you want to walk the assessor through exactly why they should
uphold your appeal.
--- Quote ---
> If so is it worth adding these details to a sticky post?
--- End Quote ---
I will probably in due course update the sticky posts with some
FAQs etc but I will not include template appeals or defences
there. Parking companies do issue broadly similar claims, which
mean defences are often broadly similar, but I'm wary of blanket
templates, as someone will inevitably use one
incorrectly/without seeking advice and mess up their case.
People will also inevitably use them without actually
understanding what they are writing, which is equally a bad
idea.
#Post#: 108919--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Charge - Overstayed beyond free time - Berkeley
Centre - Sheffield
DIR By: gravers007
Date: February 6, 2026, 8:21 am
---------------------------------------------------------
OK Heres my attempt at the POPLA appeal:
POPLA Appeal Draft:
GROUNDS FOR APPEAL:
I am appealing the parking charge notice as the registered
keeper of the vehicle. I contest this charge on multiple grounds
relating to procedural failures, evidential deficiencies, and
non-compliance with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and the
British Parking Association Code of Practice.
1. FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH PROTECTION OF FREEDOMS ACT 2012
The Notice to Keeper (NtK) was not received until 10th January
[year]. Under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012,
the NtK must be given to the keeper within 14 days beginning
with the day after the alleged parking event, or the right to
recover the charge from the keeper is lost.
The parking operator has not provided proof that the NtK was
sent within this 14-day period. The burden of proof lies with
them to demonstrate compliance. Mere assertion is insufficient -
they must provide evidence of the posting date (such as proof of
postage or certificate of posting).
As the operator has failed to prove the NtK was given within the
statutory timeframe, they have lost the right to pursue the
keeper under the PoFA 2012, and this charge should be cancelled.
2. INSUFFICIENT AND DEFECTIVE EVIDENCE
The photographic evidence provided is fundamentally deficient:
a) Unclear Registration Plate: The entry photograph is extremely
blurry and the registration plate cannot be verified beyond
reasonable doubt. POPLA has consistently held that the operator
must prove, on the balance of probabilities, that the vehicle in
the images is the one registered to the keeper. This
poor-quality image fails that standard.
b) No Evidence of Continuous Parking: The operator has provided
only entry and exit timestamps, not evidence that the vehicle
remained parked throughout this period. The vehicle frequently
makes multiple short visits to this location. Without continuous
monitoring evidence (such as regular interval photographs),
these images could reasonably show two separate compliant
visits.
c) No Signage Photographs: Despite my request, the operator has
not provided a clear photograph of the relevant signage as it
appeared on the material date. Without this, I cannot verify the
terms were clearly displayed or that a valid contract was
formed.
3. NON-COMPLIANCE WITH BPA CODE OF PRACTICE
The British Parking Association Code of Practice (which the
operator must follow as a BPA member) requires:
a) Grace Period: Section 3.3 requires a minimum 10-minute grace
period for overstays. The operator has not provided evidence
that this grace period was applied, nor have they demonstrated
that any overstay exceeded the required grace period plus the
stated maximum stay.
b) Clear Signage Requirements: Section 2 requires signs to be
clearly visible on all normal entry points, of specified minimum
size, and displaying all relevant terms including how to appeal.
The operator has not demonstrated compliance with these
requirements.
c) Adequate Appeals Information: The operator must provide clear
information about appeal rights. The reminder letter directed me
to a URL (paycharge.retailparkuk.co.uk) that only allowed
payment with no appeal mechanism, complaints procedure, or trade
association information. A different URL on the reverse did
allow appeals. This confusion and omission of mandatory
information constitutes a breach of the Code of Practice.
4. NO VALID CONTRACT FORMED
For a parking contract to be enforceable, the terms must be
adequately communicated to the driver before parking occurs.
This requires:
Clear, visible, and compliant signage at the point of entry
Terms that are legible and unambiguous
Proper notice of consequences of breach
The operator has not demonstrated that adequate signage was in
place or that the terms were properly communicated. Without
this, no valid contract was formed, and the charge is
unenforceable.
5. CHARGE IS A PENALTY, NOT LIQUIDATED DAMAGES
The parking charge appears to be a penalty rather than a genuine
pre-estimate of loss suffered by the landowner. The operator has
not demonstrated:
What actual loss the landowner suffered from an alleged minor
overstay
How the charge amount represents a genuine pre-estimate of that
loss
Under the principles established in contract law, penalty
charges are unenforceable. The operator must prove the charge is
a genuine pre-estimate of loss, which they have failed to do.
6. PROCEDURAL FAILURES UNDERMINE LEGITIMACY
The multiple procedural failures - inconsistent URLs, missing
appeal information, failure to provide requested evidence, poor
quality photographs, and apparent non-compliance with statutory
and Code requirements - demonstrate a systematic failure to meet
the standards required of BPA members and operators relying on
the PoFA 2012.
CONCLUSION:
For the reasons outlined above, this parking charge should be
cancelled. The operator has:
-Failed to prove the NtK was sent within the statutory 14-day
period
-Provided insufficient evidence to prove the alleged
contravention
-Failed to demonstrate compliance with the BPA Code of Practice
-Not proven that a valid contract was formed
-Not demonstrated the charge is enforceable rather than a
penalty
I request that POPLA find in my favor and direct the operator to
cancel this charge.
Respectfully submitted,
#Post#: 109835--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Charge - Overstayed beyond free time - Berkeley
Centre - Sheffield
DIR By: gravers007
Date: February 14, 2026, 2:39 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Any help would be appreciated on this. Thanks
#Post#: 109848--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Charge - Overstayed beyond free time - Berkeley
Centre - Sheffield
DIR By: InterCity125
Date: February 15, 2026, 2:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Looks good to me.
*****************************************************
Page 3 of 3
DIR Previous Page