Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Private parking tickets => Topic started by: bobthesod on April 18, 2026, 03:50:40 pm
-
I am utterly bemused over your actions
You count the words!! and yet claimed the first appeal was too long and you didnt read it.
All i ask is for someone to give it a quick scan and if amendments are required to just suggest
I have seen other appeals on peppipoo that appeared to run into thousands
I feel i am swimming up a waterfall.
-
Your first appeal in Reply #30 has 852 words whereas your revised appeal in Reply #33 has 988 words. I don't personally think it's more concise! But it's your appeal, do what you think is right.
-
Hopefully ,having deleted some notes,and highlighting the relative CoP parts i have redrafted the appeal.
Will this be sufficient to go ahead with?
Whilst there are no pics attached to this post, the links are shown earlier and will either be embedded in the main appeal if possible or added sererately
Got until Thurs to get this off within the 28 day limit
How would the closure be not having got this far..
could it be. 'Due to the shortness of the stop for safety reasons and the non compliance of the signage regulations in the CoP this can be cancelled' or is there something better, that
a) doesnt appear grovelling to POPLA
b) being demanding that it be cancelled
Dont want to fall at the last fence!
Thanks
APPEAL
1 I would contest that the halting of the car was a brief stop for safety reasons and was solely to ascertain why the seat belt warning had been activated,and as such that no contract could have been made in the time stated. I refers to Article 2,9 re consideration periods which states:
..a period of time in addition to a parking period where all terms and conditions have been complied with, when no parking charge can be issued is allowed to read and understand the applicable terms and conditions and decide whether to accept them and remain or reject them and leave.
However this period of time is not mentioned in the CoP
2 I also contend that as the sign is an absolute prohibition on parking, no contract for parking could be entered into, as, in order to enter into a contract the sign needs to OFFER parking for £100. By stating you're not allowed to park can be classified as a forbidding contract .However even if a contract had been agreed, it would be considered frustrated, due to the incident mentioned in point 1which occurred beyond the power of both parties.
3 Even if a contract was created (which is denied) it was frustrated as per point 1 the main argument is that is no contract was formed as the vehicle was not parked. But if it is determined that the contract was formed the terms were breached because of a vehicle fault. As this is outside of the control of both parties, therefore the contract was frustrated.
Following a further visit to the site , i consider that UKPC
SIGNAGE
Placement and Prominence of Signage
A further visit to the site to compile this appeal showed some anomalies which in my opinion, the parking company has not adhered to the BPA code of practice. I attach several pictures along with a aerial view of the location which may assist you
Now addressing the signage as laid down in the Code
4 Article 3.1.1. states
An entrance sign must be displayed and maintained at the entrance to controlled land to inform drivers as appropriate whether parking is permitted/subject to terms and conditions, including payment, or is prohibited
There are no UKPC signs on the entrance side of the road at the entrance. The first sign that is encountered is approximately 15yds inside the curtilage of the Hospital (pic in appendix or embedded) and does not comply with the sections a,c,d
5 Article 3.1.2 sections a,c,d state
The entrance sign must display:
a) the fact that terms and conditions apply to accessing/parking on the site;
c) the name of the parking operator;
d) the logo of the ATA to which the parking operator belongs
This sign does not show any of the mandated requirements
However there are three UKPC signs sited about on the other side of the road, approximately 15yds away from a driver entering the premises
I then found this in the CoP in Appendix A
A.2.2 The sign should be placed so that it is readable by drivers without their needing to
look away from the road ahead.
Which, i submit, these do not meet that criteria, as the driver will be concentrating on completion of the turn-in and to attempt to read these signs would entail a movement of the head 90 degrees to look through the side window thus taking his vision of the direction of the vehicle, and the distance is such that they are totally unreadable,
The pictures show the views, albeit from the pavement on a drivers view on entering the hospital grounds pics 3 4 5 6 . As you will see from a forward view they are just in a drivers perhipheral vision
6 Article 4.4. states
( previous relates to Blue Badge).......
The parking operator must ensure that at least one sign containing the terms and
conditions for parking can be viewed without the driver needing to leave the
vehicle, in order for drivers with a disability to be able to make an informed decision
on whether to park at the premises.
Article 3.1.6 clearly mentions
Signs must be designed and installed so as to be conspicuous and legible in
all lighting conditions during which the controlled land may legitimately be
accessed, at a height that takes account of whether the signs are intended to
be viewed from the vehicle (including by headlight in the hours of darkness) or
having left the vehicle by a driver on foot or in a wheelchair.
Note 1 also adds
For example, in car park premises open to the public in the hours of darkness,
lighting of the premises and/or the signs might be necessary depending on the location of
the signs in order to meet the test of prominence in the Consumer Rights Act 2015.
darkness) or having left the vehicle by a driver on foot or in a wheelchair
As stated earlier, the only two UKPC signs that are visible are on the outgoing lane and are placed with the bottom edge 7ft above the ground
. It is impossible to read these signs from a drivers position close enough to read the ‘small print’
As you will see from the photos there is not a sign meeting these requirements and a further search of the area proved fruitless in locating one that meets the criteria
I would also point out that as the only ambient lighting available in the vicinity are the high streetlights on the opposite of the road a mimimum of 20 yards away, and the the prime purpose of them is to illuminate the carriageway underneath , and coupled with the notices on the opposite of the road being under foliage could well be considered not to be considered sufficiently lit in the hours of darkness and I consider they would certainly require a torch due to the height over of 7ft
Dont w
-
I found this very hard to read, to the point that I didn’t bother. I suggest it needs to be more concise and to have a clearer structure similar to the suggestion in Reply #27 above. Clear headings and numbered paragraphs for starters.
-
pics to be attached to appeal
https://ibb.co/gLZZns1w
https://ibb.co/jk9kKpMQ
https://ibb.co/xq1q1jwp
https://ibb.co/s9PhcyKy
https://ibb.co/PsxxqB5k
https://ibb.co/C53fNLMV
https://ibb.co/b5rFjJsV
https://ibb.co/gbpQG07q
https://ibb.co/Fkv80qwp
https://ibb.co/m5TLXLDd
https://ibb.co/3G3wrBG
https://ibb.co/0yw2mYZ1
https://ibb.co/ZzpBtLW6
https://ibb.co/4n9FyNV3
-
At last ...hopefully the appeal ( pics will followed shortly)
Anything that needs changing, tweaking, adding, or subtracting please feel free to go ahead
I would contest that the enforced halting of the car was for safety reasons and was solely to ascertain why the seat belt warning had been activated, as prior to this the car check all conditions when leaving the drop off area further into the hospital grounds. The catch was checked and reaffixed and the lights extinguished. The driver then proceeded out of the premises, it is estimated that this took less than the minute claimed
I would also argue that in Appendix F2.3 that stopping in ‘ no stopping’ zone there is no exemption for stopping to check ‘ an amber maintenance light.’ But that stopping for a red warning light for safety concerns should be looked upon favourably .
I also contend that as the sign is an absolute prohibition on parking, no contract for parking could be entered into, as, in order to enter into a contract the sign needs to OFFER parking for £100. it cannot 'say "no parking, but if you park here you pay £100 for parking". Any sign that states you're not allowed to park can be classified as a forbidding contract .However even if a contract had been agreed, which it had not., it would be considered frustrated, due to the incident which occurred beyond the power of both parties.
Pics 1 and 2 showing correct and incorrect fitment+
Signage
A further visit to the site to compile this appeal showed some anomalies which in my opinion, the parking company has not adhered to the BPA code of practice. I attach several pictures along with a aerial view of the location which may assist yo
Now addressing the signage as laid down in the Code
Under 3.1.1
On entering the NHS area there are no UKPC signs on that side of the road. #
See pics 3,4,5,6
There is however this sign several yards in which fails under 3.1.2 sections a,c,d,
Pic 7
The entrance sign must display:
a) the fact that terms and conditions apply to accessing/parking on the site;
b) whether payment is required, or whether free parking is only available for a
limited period;
c) the name of the parking operator;
d) the logo of the ATA to which the parking operator belongs;
It just has a NHS logo in top right hand corner this is sign T2 ( pic)
It was then noticed that there are three of UKPC signs Sign T1 and two of sign T2 in close proximity on the other side of the road.
These are not instantly noticed as the entrance road is a sharp left hand bend well over 90 degrees and is not in direct view of a driver, except for a second or two on entering, in his peripheral vision.
I then found this in the CoP in Appendix A
A.2.2 The sign should be placed so that it is readable by drivers without their needing to
look away from the road ahead.
Which, i submit, these do not meet that criteria.
This is not possible as the driver will be checking the completion of the turn and looking approx 180 degrees away from them, and the distance between him and the signs is such that they are totally unreadable
The pictures show the view, albeit from the pavement on a drivers view on entering the hospital grounds pics 3 4 5 6
We then look at the two UKPC signs on the outbound side The UKPC signs (T1) are a minimum of 7ft from the ground and the ‘invalid’ signs (T2) 5ft.
Pics 7 and 12
Article 4.4. states
( previous relates to Blue Badge)....... rights to stop on yellow lines, and in doing so must ensure there are separate,
prominent, readily visible (i.e. low-placed) signs (including repeater signs)
indicating clearly that within this land Blue Badge holders are not permitted to stop
or park on yellow lines.
The parking operator must ensure that at least one sign containing the terms and
conditions for parking can be viewed without the driver needing to leave the
vehicle, in order for drivers with a disability to be able to make an informed decision
on whether to park at the premises.
As you will see from the photos there is not a sign meeting these requirements and a further search of thre area proved fruitless
None of those in position can be seen by a driver who is looking through the passenger window. And there is not a sign positioned lower for wheelchair users.. The catch 22 is if you stop to read the sign, which may take a minute or two, you will get an invoice for stopping.
I would also point out that as the only lighting available in the vicinity are the high street lights a mimimum of 20 yards away coupled with the notices on the opposite of the road being under foliage would not be considered ambient, and that the supplementary lighting be provided has not been considered. And should someone wish to read them in the hours of darkness they would certainly require a torch due to the height.
-
My question, the letter received onlt says as required under the POFA act 2012 Should the relevant section and paragraph also been stated
No.
The requirements of PoFA 2012 need to be followed.
There is no need to quote the legislation in any way.
Of course, any formal defence ought to state why the requirements of PoFA 2012 are not complied with, along with a statement of the requirements of the legislation, but that’s just good form.
It’s also my personal opinion that no court would uphold the case against you, so if I’m right you just have to continue with the process until either the claimant gives up or - unlikely though it would be to actually come to court - a court rules in your favour.
-
I now have more pictures to assist and can be very pedantic on several.Hopefully the full appeal will be up on here for critique
A small clarification
the BPA CoP 2.18 note 1 states the following
document issued to a driver, keeper, hire company or hirer that details the parking
charge(s) deemed payable in respect of the parking of a vehicle on controlled land
including those issued under provisions of The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.
NOTE 1: For a Notice to Keeper - the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 definition in
Schedule 4, paragraphs 8 or 9 (depending upon whether a notice to driver was served
first, or not) specifies the basic form and content of the notice issued under the Act.
My question, the letter received onlt says as required under the POFA act 2012 Should the relevant section and paragraph also been stated
Also i saw somewhere that the House of Commons has commented on a situation such as mine and consider it to be a force majeure agian is it worth adding to the contract frustration that the seat belt caused
And lastly in the Appendix section f2.1 it mentions that exceptions do not include
NOTE: This does not include where the vehicle is stopped at the zebra crossing to allow
a passenger to enter or exit the vehicle.
• to check an amber vehicle maintenance light
As the seat belt indicator is Red and accompanied by a bell (pics will be shown) is it worth bringing that to the adjudicators notice
TIA
-
I'd be more detailed and more structured. The POPLA assessor is coming into this with no prior knowledge of the event. Separate each point under clear headings, and walk the assessor through exactly why each point is correct. Where possible, refer explicitly to the Private Parking Sector Single Code of Practice to back up your points.
As I see it, your main points are:
- The vehicle was not parked: under this point are several arguments: a brief stop owing due to a vehicle issue is not 'parking'; the stop was of such brief duration that no contract could have been formed - reference the consideration period specified by the Code of Practice here
- The signage is 'forbidding': a contract required several elements to be legally valid, including an offer and valuable consideration. The signage you have shown us only prohibits parking. How can a sign that says "Strictly No Parking" communicate a contractual offer to park? What valuable consideration is being offered by UKPC? It's not making an offer to park on certain terms.
- Even if a contract was created (which is denied), it was frustrated: as per point #1, your main argument is no contract was formed as the vehicle wasn't parked. But, you can argue that even if the assessor took the view that the vehicle was parked and a contract was formed, the only reason the terms of said contract were breached is because of a vehicle fault. As this is outside of the control of both parties, and therefore the contract was frustrated.
- Placement and prominence of signage: support any such points with photos showing the insufficiency of the signage
-
Can you be as picky on my earlier posting regarding the appeal? lol
-
“de minimis” to be picky, it’s ablative plural …… de minimis non curat lex.
Latin O Level 1977.
-
I am now in the process of comping my appeal and the first draft is below
Would appreciate comment and suggestions on it
As the registered keeper i am appealing against the parking notice issued bt UKPC at xxxxxxx on the xxxxxx
You will note that the alleged stopping was for a period of one minute.
This was due to the fact that as the driver was leaving the hospital site the seat belt light illuminated to signify the belt was not securely fastened, This was checked as the driver was not prepared to drive on a main road without the vehicle being compliant with the various Road Traffic Acts,.and after confirming all was now well they proceed onto the main road. Their personal safety being paramount.
I offer that this alone is enough to warrant the charge to be dismissed and as well as the vehicle was stopped for not more than one minute, ‘de minimus’ could be offered.
Further reading of the Code of practice reveals several anomalies that UKPC have not, in my opinon adhered to.
These are
2.15 Grace period and Consideration periods. A recommendation of 5mins to read signs. In order to accept or reject the conditions. Whilst this only mentions car parks it would be prudent to include other signs such as those displayed and i would claim that any stoppage to rectify a minor fault of the vehicle should also be taken into consideration. However to do so here, with the tenacity that UKPC have shown, puts a driver is in a catch 22 situation if he wished to check on the conditions as by stopping to read the sign if only for one minute, he falls fouls of the restrictions especially as the main sign is sited over 7ft from the ground, and the interim signs are 5ft
3.1 signs section 3.1.3 (c) the sign advising no stopping does not comply as it does not show who the operator is and no contact details in fact it gives the impression that this is a NHS issued notice and they will raise a charge
(d) not displaying the logo of the ATA
In view of the fact that an adjacent sign may well be complaint this could be taken as an interim repeater sign.
3.1.4 the details concerning a parking charge is not in a font of comparable size
-
Here are pics i took this morning. you will note that there is only one notice on the way in but 4 ( 2 duplicates] on exit The bottom of the notices are 5ft and 7ft respectively and cannot be seen clearly from a vehicle.
It was considered earlier on here that they are wanting, if so is it worth adding these as second item in the appeal and what would be the best way of putting it?
At the moment i only have the seatbelt reason,and two letters to UKPC has been rejected
Unfortunately i cannot see any way of padding it out perhaps someone more experienced could suggest something Here is what i am writing in the appeal
I am appealing this charge on the following grounds
The reason for the temporary stop was that the seatbelt warning sysmbol appeared on the dashboard...see photos showing normal and not connected pics of information panel. The car was halted and a check made of the connection and subsequently the screen showed normal.
I am sure you will agree that the driver did not wish to proceed in a vehicle that was not compliant with the various road traffic acts,and having i sufficient prtection in the case of an accident on the public highway.
In addition as noted in the originsl invoice this action was no more that one nimute and would request that the appeals board consider cancelling the charge on the grounds of 'de minimus'
Then if the notices has some possibilty in either wording and positioning this would be item 2
I look forwrd to any suggestions, amendments, additions you amy wish to add.
https://ibb.co/v4J5gjNF
https://ibb.co/m5xBzxV7
https://ibb.co/B2qTKNqH
https://ibb.co/TBGFB1tK
https://ibb.co/qMGnqvzq
https://ibb.co/DPD8K03s
https://ibb.co/cctc3GBT
https://ibb.co/sdz2qvmc
https://ibb.co/6c2t4HTb
https://ibb.co/FqwX3J4K
-
Yes i want to appeal
I will pop down to the Hospital and tske copious pics
One question i have seen on other appeals that the parking oc sends in an evidence pack.
will this be more pictures video etc ,as on the initial letter it tells me further pictures srsw available, but on checking there was only one and that was of the reg plate!
-
Just what they would like you to do perhaps when you get a work person to charge you £80 a minute then you may consider that. A perfectly winnable case but your choice you can see how the company profits grow.
-
copy of rejection letters from ukpc. the reverse is the sasme hence only one uploaded
https://ibb.co/8nR7pKcp
https://ibb.co/Q7hPh50T
https://ibb.co/GQGPkBcj
Whilst the stopping is the main appeal point,on looking at the pictures of the signs posted earlier that one 'offers a contract' by reason of No parking on Roadway
However the second picture that says bo stopping does not mention a fee payable for stopping.
Also the signs are well above the eyeline of a driver passing and certainly out of site if parked adjacent to then if viewing through the passenger window.
Would it be worth revisiting the site to get more pictures and dimensions etc i cannot remember seeing signes on the entrance side of the road ,nor further down
Would this side appeal add any weight to the main one, especially if the first fails, we have this sineage issue to fall back on, as signage appeals are specifically mentioned on the popla website.
-
I don’t personally want to see them, but as a general rule if you want advice on something you’ve received you need to show it to us!
You need to construct a POPLA appeal. You may want to consider https://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/AOS/Sector%20Code%20Templates/sectorsingleCodeofPracticeVersion1.1130426-2.pdf
-
My apologies
The replies were on email and i was in a bit of a rush reading it. they have supplied a popla ref. On second reading it is in the top rh corner! no wonder i missed it
Do you still wish to see them?
-
Post the letters you’re talking about, please.
-
`As expected the appeal was thrown out, and i got a letter requea]sting more information. I could do no better that repaet my intial appeal.
Yesterday another refusal arrived and it advised that if i wish to appeal i need to get a reference number from popla.
On looking at a popla page it seems that i have to get this from UKPC
Who is correct?
Secondly on the polpa site it mentions various appeals and one includes signs
As DWMB2 noted earlier would this be worth adding it to the popla appeal on 'no clear offer of contract' as a secondary appeal and would the fact than when the car stopped opposite the sign, it cound not be read from the drivers position. Is it worth returning to the site and getting more pics and also the relative height of the sign?
Any assistance gratefully accepted
Thanks
-
This gets worse,it looks like i am now in for the long haul. Notice was dated 16 April
It was recieved on 18th April. I went to pay the discounted charge just now and was rather peeved that it is now 80.00.
surely it should be 14 days from delivery?
Anyway, Could someone please give a quick once over on the intial appeal to UKPC,which no doubt they will throw out, and offer any advice if it should be amended when i appeal to popla and would it bbe worth any extra weight on adding copmments about the no stopping sign not offering a contract, which is on a separate board 20 yards away
INITIAL APPEAL TO UKPC
On leaving the site .the safety belt warning light was activated. The driver stopped to check the reason why and following checks that the belt was now securely attached and light extinguished proceeded.
I, as the registered keeper feel that as this was a safety issue and to drive the car in such a condition that contravened the various Road traffic Acts would not be the course of action.Luckily in lersds than a minute the situation was rectified and the driver then proceeded off the site.
-
Well
Despite all the advice i have recieved, i have decided to pay the buggers tomorrow ( last day for discount), as feel i would not bee able to put a winning 'defence' at popla with what i has een suggested/advised and end up paying 80.00.
-
I have also had a look on google street view and it would appear that these signs replaced those in place in July 2024
They are sited abbout 50yds from the pedestrian entrance to the hospital, and with traffic constantly using the facility the driver would have to park either in the 10min drop off zone at the main entrance or use the paid car park and walk back to read them
Re the wording on the signs.. how would the best way be to put forward a case on that point, or would it be better to concentrate on the reason for a temporary halt and add the wording as an additional point.
I have until Thursday to decide wheter to pay or fight as the registered keeper.
I cannot expand on the reason for the stop other than for safety reasons.
-
Couple of immediate points...
Neither of those signs would appear to communicate any contractual offer, all they do is forbid parking.
The £80 charge isn't particularly prominent on the sign saying that roadway parking is forbidden. Given the charge is one of the key components of the alleged contract, it should be clearer.
-
Any thoughts on this if it will stand a chance at POPLA?
-
Are these ok?
https://ibb.co/k65MVkNX
https://ibb.co/tPqzmpJL
https://ibb.co/zhWqPnVC
https://ibb.co/zV9vsB3j
https://ibb.co/B2L9HWLj
https://ibb.co/8LVnhBSH
-
Most people who post here are able to work it out, and the people who give advice here are doing it for free. Sorry. I can only suggest you find a friend to help you.
-
Unfortunately the link does not show how to post a link from imgbb onto here
I am totally computer dense and rely on a click this /move that instructions
There is nothing either on the imgbb site except i now have an album but nothing to show how to let it be shown on here the only address i have is this
https://bobthesod.imgbb.com/albums
If thsat is it then i have solved something,but dont know how. !!
-
Read the link in Reply #1 again for advice on posting images.
-
The Story so far
Driver visited Frimley Park Hospital, and on exixting got a safety belt warning show on the information screen.
He stopped the vehicle to investigate and after checking that the 'fault' had been cleared continued on his way out. Drivers estimate for this action, no more than one minute.. possibly as little as 15sec.
RK received PCN claiming vehicle was stationary for one minute exactly in an area designated no stopping by the Parking Company
RK was intially advised to check procedure and contacted the PALS service at Frimley Park Hosp, who gave the RK an email address to instigate the appeal. This was done and although the appeal was delivered correctly, it had not been read which concerned the RK
RK then asked PALS for a contact number and they advised contact is email only
RK then rang the hospital direct for the dept involved, which they had no knowledge of, and passed me onto the security who told the RK to send in an appeal on the UKPC site
So next stage? attached are the PCN copy and photos raken od the signs. It will be boted that the Highways DYL go into the Hospital but at the point where the UKPC sign is sited have been over painted red!
Question.... looking at the UKPC appeal site i have to choose between the Driver/RK/RKand driver/
At this stage would i be in order to put RK ?
There isnt a convuloted explanation on times/delays etc to put forward. Only that the safety beltwarning light came on and as such the car was not in a safe condition to proceed. Once rectified is was then compliant, and driver continued on their journay. They feel aggrieved that they should be penalised for checking that their own safety was not compromised in continuing without confirming everything was ok, and that the time stopped was necessary to check the equipment.
It may be noted that the time stamps on both pictures appear to be the same,and the addtl pictures mentioned on the UKPC website number, are 2 in total, one of which is a copy of the one on the PCN..the other a close up of number plate
What now is the best course of action? Has it got a better than even chance at POPLA or do i pay up now and 'save' 40.00 should it fail?
Picvs are ow on an imgbb album....Q how do i get the link on here for yout to view?
-
Ok Link read
Your next step is to follow the instructions in that link. Our advice will only be as good as the information you provide us.
-
Ok Link read
Haver visited PALS this am and they said i was to appeal and once givern a PCN number? ( surely this is the parking charge reference number?) to contact the Frimley Hospital appeals site
I looked at the UKPC site and it would appear that i appeal to them first and have a choice of three options Driver/Registered Keeper/and Driver AND registered keeper, i have not completed the form ,but would my first contact be a registered keeper
I have also drafted a letter to the Frimley appeals asking the.as employers of UKPC to waive the charge as it was no longer that one minute and the reason for not proceeding was a safety concern that was rectified in the time claimed. perhaps using 'de minimus' as a reason.
Therefore would my next action be to contact Frimley first and see their reply ,or go to UKPC site who no doubt will reject it? Just need to get everything in correct order
Thanks
-
What info, other than name/invoice number pics etc need to be redacted?
Also have diagram that may help
Just read the link I gave you, please.
-
Have more info on situation
with copy of the invoice
What info, other than name/invoice number pics etc need to be redacted?
Also have diagram that may help
-
Yes.
https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/
PALS if applicable.
Hospitals are private land, not council land.
-
Just seen an invoice from them for stopping for ONE minute at Frimley Park Hospital Surrey on the road out. there is a possibility that yellow lines are in existence... but do they carry any weight legally on Hospital property? which i assume it as otherwise it would be local council authority.I sm going there on Friday to check it out re signs etc The driver is a bit agrieved as the time shows stopped for 0hrs 1min 0 secs!! and stopped as a warning sign popped up re seatbelt. checked everything ok and carried on.Are UKPC litigous? and for 1min is it worth going to popla?