-
It is still worth posting the full POPLA result, including the name of the Assessor. Just try and add a few paragraph breaks so that it is more easily readable.
-
Well done, and thank you.
“I therefore feel that the PCN was not issued incorrectly”
followed by
“I do not feel that the PCN has been issued correctly”
make no sense to me as presented. But you succeeded, so it doesn’t really matter.
-
This may also be helpful for people on here to read as this was what the POPLA Assessor outlined as a summary of the case:
"The appellant has provided a detailed account of events. For the purpose of my report, I have summarised the grounds into the following points and have checked each point before coming to my conclusion. The appellant says that: 1. Non-compliance with PoFA 2012 – paragraphs 9(2)(e)(i) and 9(2)(f). 2. Notice not ‘given’ within 14 days. 3. Unclear and insufficient signage in the dark. 4. Failure to consider Equality Act 2010 obligations. 5. Driver not identified – Keeper liability not established. 6. No evidence of landowner authority. The appellant reiterated their version of events in the motorist’s comments section. Assessor summary of reasons"
It just gives a useful overview that I hope others on here can benefit from. Thanks again!
-
Hello all.
I have had the outcome from POPLA come through regarding the Appeal on this and..... IT WAS SUCCESSFUL!
Thank you so much for all the guidance and help.
The statement from POPLA was long, so I am just sharing the last paragraph as that encapsulates what this was about and should help fellow 'fighters' I hope with their own cases as it explains why they rejected the Operators reasoning and upheld our appeal
"Ultimately, it is the operator's responsibility to ensure the signage is readable and understandable at all times, including during the hours of darkness, early morning or at dusk, and the evidence provided to me does not prove this. It is in the operator's gift to provide all the relevant photographic evidence in their evidence pack to prove their case and in this instance they have not. I therefore feel that the PCN was not issued incorrectly and allow the appeal. In conclusion, I do not feel that the PCN has been issued correctly for the reasons outlined above. I can see that the appellant has referenced other points within their appeal to POPLA, but I do not feel that these need to be reviewed based on the outcome reached."
Again, thank you so much for all the assistance and lets hope I won't need to be on here again for a while!
-
Thank you, thank you. I have now submitted that and will keep the forum posted. It is so easy to get blindsided and panicked by the amount of wording, documents and so called 'evidence' they produce. I know it is all to overwhelm and encourage you to 'cave' and just pay the money to make it go away.
I have stepped back, taken a moment, reminded myself that it is all about these awful companies making easy money off the back of people going about their day, who have simply overstayed or not spotted a parking fee sign.
Your help is once again hugely appreciated.
-
It's just a POPLA appeal. Stop panicking! Even unsuccessful, it has no bearing on anything going forwards.
Use this as your response:
The operator’s evidence pack fails to address multiple key points raised in the original appeal.
1. PoFA non-compliance – The operator has not rebutted or even acknowledged the deficiencies identified in the Notice to Keeper, including the absence of the required invitation to the keeper under paragraph 9(2)(e)(i), and the incorrect wording under 9(2)(f). They have simply repeated that the notice was issued to the keeper using PoFA without demonstrating actual compliance.
2. Notice not ‘given’ within 14 days – The operator ignores the fact that the notice was not received at the keeper’s address due to redirection, and has provided no proof of actual delivery. Under paragraph 9(6) of PoFA, the presumption of service is rebuttable, and it has been rebutted in this case. No response has been made to this challenge.
3. Signage – The operator asserts that signage is ‘ample’ and ‘compliant’ but provides no night-time images to prove that it was visible and legible at 10:40pm when the driver entered. They have not rebutted the specific point that there were no clear instructions visible to the driver regarding payment or registration after dark.
4. Equality Act 2010 – The operator has entirely failed to engage with or even mention the disability disclosure made during the appeal, nor have they acknowledged that a Letter of Authority was submitted and accepted. This omission is serious. They were on notice that a vulnerable person was involved and took no steps to consider reasonable adjustments or exercise discretion. This is a breach of their statutory duties under the Equality Act 2010.
5. Driver not identified – The operator has made no attempt to argue that the driver has been identified and has relied solely on keeper liability. Since they cannot rely on PoFA due to the defects in the notice and failure to comply with time limits, no liability can pass to the keeper.
6. Landowner authority – The operator refers to having “written authority” but has not provided any contemporaneous, unredacted landowner contract. A vague assertion of authority is insufficient to establish standing to issue or enforce charges.
In short, the operator has provided a generic evidence bundle that ignores every material point raised in the appeal. No attempt has been made to engage with the facts or legal arguments. The appeal should be allowed.
-
I can't see anything new as such, just going on about how clear the signage is and the vehicle had headlights on in the photo and therefore should have seen the 'ample signage' about 1.5 hr parking max stay.
Feeling somewhat overwhelmed and panicked about how to best manage the response to this.
This is what ParkingEye have written, along with supporting documents which include photos of car entering and exiting and a map of the MacDonalds car park pointing out the signage which does apparently show there are several signs but apart from the entrance one, as far as I know, all small and it was dark, not daylight.
Do I just restate what I sent in the appeal?
The ParkingEye response includes all correspondence with dates, the notices, map of the site with signs highlighted, but no reference to any of the 'human stuff' like the disability being raised, sent to wrong address, it was the middle of the night, dark, no other cars in the car park, just dates.
This was what ParkingEye included as a covering note in their response:
Financial Current Value £100.00 Outstanding £100.00 Paid To Date £0.00
Photographs In Out Case History
01/04/2025 Date of event System check/manual check identified breach of terms and conditions, prior to DVLA request
03/04/2025 Request queued to DVLA for keeper details
04/04/2025 DVLA response received - Success (Legislation Used: POFA_POPLA - Issued To: Keeper)
04/04/2025 Parking Charge Letter Issued - Letter1 - Ltr01-210
13/04/2025 Parking Charge Letter Issued - Letter2 - Ltr02-210
15/04/2025 Letter Issued - Website Appeal Response
15/04/2025 Website Appeal received for this case and is queued for processing. 02/05/2025 Letter Issued - GDPR Request - With Appeal
02/05/2025 Letter Issued - Driver Details Required From Keeper POFA
02/06/2025 Letter Issued - **Unsuccessful POPLA - Pro-Active Rules and Conditions This site is a 1½ hour maximum stay customer car park as clearly stated on the signage (enclosed). 1½ hour max stay. No return within 1 hour. Blue Badge holders – all terms & conditions apply. Park within marked bays No parking on yellow lines/hatched areas We have included a signage plan showing that there are signs situated at the entrance, exit and throughout the car park displaying the terms and conditions of the site. Authority
We can confirm that the above site is on private land, is not council owned and that we have written authority to operate and issue Parking Charge Notices at this site from the landowner (or landowner’s agent).
It must also be noted that any person who makes a contract in his own name without disclosing the existence of a principal, or who, though disclosing the fact that he is acting as an agent on behalf of a principal, renders himself personally liable on the contract, is entitled to enforce it against the other contracting party. (Fairlie v Fenton (1870) LR 5 Exch 169).
It follows that a lawful contract between ourselves and the motorist will be enforceable by us as a party to that contract. Additional Information The BPA has provided clarity to both motorists and parking management companies regarding grace periods which can be found in the Private Parking Single Code of Practice. www.britishparking.co.uk/code-of-practice-and-compliance-monitoring Parkingeye are fully compliant with the Private Parking Sector Single Code of Practice in relation to Grace Periods.
Parkingeye use Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) cameras and not CCTV cameras to monitor car parks. This technology captures and photographs vehicles entering and exiting the car park and compares this data to the maximum stay that vehicles are entitled to and, where applicable, any payment or permit that may relate to the registration captured.
We ensure that all our signage is clear, ample, and in keeping with the Private Parking Sector Single Code of Practice regulations. The signage at this site demonstrates adequate colour contrast between the text and the backgrounds advised in the Private Parking Sector Single Code of Practice. As the images show, the vehicle had its headlights on. This would have rendered the many signs in the car park visible.
Please note, our website appeals portal now asks the appellant to confirm that all supporting evidence relating to the Parking Charge has been attached. This confirmation is displayed in the website appeal document included in this evidence pack. Our ANPR records confirm the vehicle remained in the car park. The car park name, along with the entry and exit times can be found on the parking charge notice.
We have included further records of the vehicle’s movements recorded on the date of the event. Whitelist Lookup –
Whitelist Name Plate Description Start Date/Time End Date/Time Input Date/Time Duration No results The above system extract displays all permits, payments for parking, and terminal entries relating to the vehicle on the date of the parking event.
Please note, if no results are displayed, this confirms that no permit, payment, or terminal entries were recorded. Inbound, Outbound Correspondence and Car Park Signage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
-
Just go through their evidence pack and note anything they have not either rebutted or responded to in your appeal. Also, if there is anything in their evidence pack that is new or you can rebut, do so.
There are plenty of POPLA appeals on the forum with operator evidence responses, just adapt one of those if necessary.
-
HI there, I have had the dreaded response from Popla asking for responses to the Operators response to the appeal. Parking eye's response is 33 pages long! Shows all the Max 1.5 hr Parking Signs on a map of the MacDonalds site, copies of all correspondence between us including Privacy request, Authorisation for me to act on sons behalf etc etc.
Obviously I don't want to dump 33 pages of this on here as it is a repeat of all the emails I have sent, and their responses along with the POPLA process I needed to follow.
The POPLA appeal gives me 1 week to provide comments on the Operators response, which is basically everything they have already sent and saying signs were there, the notice was sent, the acknowledgement of change of address on V5 forms sorted, me being the contact was confirmed etc etc.
I would be enormously grateful for help in how to 'respond to the operator' with my comments which must be in by 26th June. Let me know if you needs to see any of the documents.
-
Submitted! Will keep you up to date when I hear and thanks again.
-
If the POPLA appeal is unsuccessful, then the decision is not binding on you. You don't pay the invoice.
It will likely go as far as a court claim but the odds of it actually ever reaching hearing are very slim with the outcome usually being a strike out or a discontinuation. We will advise on every step of the way.
-
I am about to submit the appeal and the only attachment is the Letter of Consent, other than that, it is exactly the wording above. Out of interest, if the appeal is rejected by POPLA, what can be done next? Is there another avenue? At the end of the day, I am all in with seeing this through as I am sick to death of these awful companies hounding law abiding, busy, ordinary people who are just going about their day trying to scrape a living and get on, with threatening, misleading demands for ridiculously huge amounts of money for 'crime' of parking in their car park. If we lose, so be it, it will have cost time and a fine that I can't imagine is much more than what they demand anyway. Again, thank you so much for the expertise and hand holding. Shall I just press go or is there anything else I can add in to the appeal that occurs to anyone?
-
You're right to tread carefully here. On the POPLA form:
• "Your details" should be your name and contact information, as you are the person submitting the appeal and have authority to act on the Registered Keeper’s behalf.
• "Motorist’s details" is intended to refer to the Registered Keeper – not necessarily the driver.
Therefore:
• You should enter your son's details (name and address) under "Motorist’s details", as he is the person the PCN was issued to.
• This does not admit who was driving. POPLA will not treat this as an admission that the Keeper was the driver unless you say so explicitly in the appeal narrative.
You've already uploaded the Letter of Consent (LoC), which covers why you're acting on his behalf. Just ensure your appeal wording continues to state clearly that:
“The identity of the driver is not being provided, and the operator cannot rely on the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 due to statutory non-compliance.”
So you're doing everything correctly – just don’t refer to your son as the driver in the body of the appeal and you'll avoid any misstep.
-
Sorry to ask this but I am currently on the POPLA appeal and it asks for the Motorists Details. I have uploaded the Letter of Consent to say I have authority to act on my sons behalf, who is the Registered Keeper and will be putting my details as Your Details but assume I have to put my sons details in Motorists Details? I am aware of course that we are not admitting who the Driver was, therefore wanted to not take any missteps at this stage.
-
Thank you, I think your reference to it in the wording of the appeal is what I will stick with and therefore not include the photo at this time, I shall send the appeal then and thank you, I shall keep you posted.
-
Unless the photo shows errors in the wording that can be used against them, and it is taken in similar lighting conditions that were at the time of the alleged contravention, this is is unlikely to be of much use.
Without seeing gather photo you are referring to, it is impossible to give further advice.
-
Brilliant, thank you. Should I therefore not worry about attaching the Google Maps photos because, in all honesty, in sun and daylight, the sign looks quite visible in the photo so it is 50/50 as to how much credibility it gives to the argument of poor signage.
I will just hold fire on sending the above exactly as laid out until you confirm whether to that if okay. Once I have the okay, I shall get the appeal off to POPLA.
-
That is a strong draft overall and covers the key points. With some refinement to improve clarity, structure, and POPLA appeal tone, here is a suggested revised version and incorporating your original arguments more precisely:
I am submitting this appeal on behalf of the Registered Keeper, who has a recognised disability affecting their executive function and ability to manage correspondence. A signed Letter of Authority was submitted and accepted by ParkingEye during the initial appeal process. From that point forward, all correspondence has been conducted via their appointed representative. ParkingEye were therefore on notice that a vulnerable person is involved and had a duty under the Equality Act 2010 to consider and apply reasonable adjustments. Their failure to do so must weigh heavily against them.
1. Non-compliance with PoFA 2012 – paragraphs 9(2)(e)(i) and 9(2)(f)
The Notice to Keeper fails to comply with the mandatory wording required under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Specifically, it does not include the required invitation to the keeper to pay, and it does not meet the conditions for transferring liability from the driver to the keeper. Therefore, the operator cannot rely on PoFA to pursue the keeper for this charge.
2. Notice not ‘given’ within 14 days
The PCN was sent to an outdated address and was only received after redirection. The operator obtained the address from the DVLA, but the V5C had not yet been updated at the time. The presumption of delivery under PoFA paragraph 9(6) is rebuttable, and in this case, it has been rebutted. The operator is put to strict proof of when the notice was actually received by the keeper.
3. Unclear and insufficient signage
The driver visited the site after 10:40pm in the dark. There was no prominent signage indicating a requirement to pay or register if staying beyond 90 minutes. Google Street View images show that signage at this location has changed and was not always present or visible. Even where signage exists, it is not sufficient to alert a reasonable person late at night, particularly where no clear “PAY HERE” instructions or visible payment machines are present. The operator is put to strict proof that the signage was adequate, prominent, and in full compliance with the BPA Code of Practice.
4. Failure to consider Equality Act 2010 obligations
The driver of the vehicle is disabled and has diagnosed ADHD and associated mental health conditions (confirmed by their GP), which affect time perception, attention, and executive function. These conditions meet the definition of disability under the Equality Act 2010.
While the operator may not have known this at the time of the parking event, they were explicitly informed during the appeal process that the Keeper is a vulnerable person with a recognised disability and is unable to manage their own correspondence. A signed Letter of Authority was submitted and accepted by ParkingEye, who continued correspondence with the appointed representative.
The Equality Act 2010 imposes both anticipatory and responsive duties on service providers. ParkingEye had a duty to anticipate the needs of disabled motorists by ensuring signage and payment methods are accessible to those with cognitive impairments. Once they were made aware of the driver’s disability, they had a further responsive duty to consider reasonable adjustments, including reassessing whether enforcement of this charge was appropriate in the circumstances.
Their failure to take any such steps — despite being put on notice — amounts to a breach of their statutory duty under the Act.
5. Driver not identified – Keeper liability not established
The driver has not been identified. The operator cannot rely on PoFA to hold the Keeper liable because (a) the notice was non-compliant and (b) it was not “given” within the required timeframe. Therefore, no liability can transfer to the keeper.
6. No evidence of landowner authority
The operator is put to strict proof of a valid, unredacted, contemporaneous contract with the landowner that permits them to issue and enforce parking charges at this location in their own name. A witness statement or contract with a managing agent is not sufficient. POPLA and case law are clear that only the landowner or a party with proprietary rights can authorise such enforcement.
Given the above, this charge is invalid and must be cancelled. The driver was a legitimate customer of the restaurant, remained on-site, purchased a meal, and there was no reason to believe any parking charge would arise from simply sitting and eating. The operator's failure to comply with PoFA, to consider the protected characteristics of the parties involved, and to demonstrate landowner authority all require this appeal to be allowed.
-
Hi. I have made a couple of small adjustments to the above response you have kindly put together for me and wanted to share it for critiquing. I have a Word document with the two photos of the MacDonalds car park I have got from Google Maps that I can upload but cannot quite remember how to do it, I do apologise.
Thank you for your input in advance:
I am submitting this appeal on behalf of the registered keeper, who has a recognised disability that affects their executive functioning and ability to manage correspondence. Due to these circumstances, a Letter of Authority was submitted to ParkingEye during the initial appeal. This was accepted by the operator, who has since continued to correspond with me as the keeper’s authorised representative. From that point onward, ParkingEye were fully aware that a vulnerable person was involved and should have acted in accordance with their obligations under the Equality Act 2010. Their failure to consider or apply any reasonable adjustments must weigh heavily against them in this appeal.
The notice to keeper fails to comply with paragraph 9(2)(e)(i) and 9(2)(f) of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. It does not invite the keeper to pay the unpaid charge and does not contain the required wording to transfer liability to the keeper. As a result, the operator cannot rely on PoFA to pursue the keeper.
The notice to keeper was not deemed given within 14 days, as required under paragraph 9(5). It was sent to an old address and only received after being redirected. The presumption under PoFA that a notice is deemed delivered two working days after posting has been rebutted in this case. The operator must prove when the notice was actually received.
The signage at this site has not always been there as can be seen in the photos below taken from Google Maps where the first one does not show any signage and the one below that shows the sign is there but with no indication of where or how to pay, just that there is further signage in the car park somewhere. The Driver is not a regular visitor so therefore did not know to look for signs that were not originally there in previous visits, particular when it was dark, after 10.40pm and lighting was not particularly good and there was no visible payment machine or prominent PAY HERE signage to alert the driver that any action was required beyond parking and entering the restaurant. There appears to only be one other sign which is small and with no obvious means of where to pay. The operator is put to strict proof that signage was clear, conspicuous, and met the BPA Code of Practice standards.
On top of which, the driver is disabled and has diagnosed ADHD and mental health conditions that affect time perception, spatial awareness and attention. The operator failed to consider their duty under the Equality Act 2010 to anticipate and make reasonable adjustments, such as prominent and clear signage inside the MacDonalds restaurant, warning patrons of the need to restrict their stay to within 90 minutes, and how to pay if they planned to stay over 90 minutes or risk receiving a parking fine. This is not a discretionary matter. It is a legal obligation.
The driver has not been identified. The operator cannot rely on PoFA because the notice is non-compliant and was not delivered within the required timeframe. No liability can be transferred to the keeper.
The operator is put to strict proof of a valid, unredacted contract with the landowner that was in effect at the time of the alleged contravention and permits them to issue and enforce parking charges in their own name at this specific site. A witness statement or site agreement with a managing agent is not sufficient. Only the landowner or a party with legal standing to authorise enforcement can grant such authority.
I therefore, on behalf of the registered Keeper of the vehicle ask all the above points to be taken into consideration and the parking charge issued by ParkingEye for a stay of less than 210 minutes in a MacDonalds car park be dismissed, where the Driver had purchased a meal and stayed to eat it, having been made unaware by the restaurant staff that there was a maximum stay of 90 minutes, or a clear sign about how to pay if staying over that time.
Kind regards,
-
Thank you Karma. I have asked son to try and get some photos of the signage at night but he says that now he is aware of them, they are pretty clear, its just that he had simply not registered them at all. You can see there are signs there on some Google maps pictures but not on others, but its not clear when they were put up.
I will give this proper attention and research the forum for other responses and take my time doing so and then share to get your input before sending anything to POPLA.
-
Don't sound surprised. I did say this in post #37:
You can also choose to do nothing and wait for their formal rejection with the POPLA code, which they’ve said will follow after 28 days.
The appeal has now been rejected by ParkingEye, and they’ve issued a POPLA code. You now have 33 days from the date of this rejection (2 June 2025) to submit a POPLA appeal. That is plenty of time to prepare and you should do a search of the forum to find other POPLA appeals and note the structure of those appeals.
You can now begin drafting your POPLA submission. This will focus on the most compelling legal and evidential arguments, including:
• Non-compliance with PoFA 2012 – particularly 9(2)(e)(i) and 9(2)(f)
• Notice not deemed ‘given’ within 14 days due to misdirected address (rebutting the presumption)
• Lack of evidence of a clear contract and signage, especially at night
• Failure to consider disability-related reasonable adjustments under the Equality Act 2010
• Driver not identified – and no Keeper liability established
• Put them to strict proof that they has a valid contract flowing from the landowner at the time
This is a bare bones outline for your POPLA appeal. You should research each point and expand on them. You are leading the POPLA assessor to the conclusion that the PCN has been issued incorrectly and that they should uphold your appeal. Do not send anything until you've shown us what you intend to write so that we can advise further. As mentioned, you have until 5th July to submit this, so don't rush it:
1. I am submitting this appeal on behalf of the registered keeper, who has a recognised disability that affects their executive functioning and ability to manage correspondence. Due to these circumstances, a Letter of Authority was submitted to ParkingEye during the initial appeal. This was accepted by the operator, who has since continued to correspond with me as the keeper’s authorised representative. From that point onward, ParkingEye were fully aware that a vulnerable person was involved and should have acted in accordance with their obligations under the Equality Act 2010. Their failure to consider or apply any reasonable adjustments must weigh heavily against them in this appeal.
2. The notice to keeper fails to comply with paragraph 9(2)(e)(i) and 9(2)(f) of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. It does not invite the keeper to pay the unpaid charge and does not contain the required wording to transfer liability to the keeper. As a result, the operator cannot rely on PoFA to pursue the keeper.
3. The notice to keeper was not deemed given within 14 days, as required under paragraph 9(5). It was sent to an old address and only received after being redirected. The presumption under PoFA that a notice is deemed delivered two working days after posting has been rebutted in this case. The operator must prove when the notice was actually received.
4. The signage at this site is not clear or visible in the conditions at the time. The incident occurred just after midnight. The car park was poorly lit, and there was no visible payment machine or prominent signage to alert the driver that any action was required beyond parking and entering the restaurant. The operator is put to strict proof that signage was clear, conspicuous, and met the BPA Code of Practice standards.
5. The driver is disabled and has diagnosed ADHD and mental health conditions that affect time perception, spatial awareness and attention. The operator failed to consider their duty under the Equality Act 2010 to anticipate and make reasonable adjustments, such as additional time allowances or more prominent instructions. This is not a discretionary matter. It is a legal obligation.
6. The driver has not been identified. The operator cannot rely on PoFA because the notice is non-compliant and was not delivered within the required timeframe. No liability can be transferred to the keeper.
7. The operator is put to strict proof of a valid, unredacted contract with the landowner that was in effect at the time of the alleged contravention and permits them to issue and enforce parking charges in their own name at this specific site. A witness statement or site agreement with a managing agent is not sufficient. Only the landowner or a party with legal standing to authorise enforcement can grant such authority.
-
And here is the Popla appeals part of it:
02 June 2025
Reference: Parking Charge Notice - 588456/770105
POPLA Ref: 6061535201
The quickest and easiest way to submit your
appeal is online. This usually takes 15 minutes.
Simply visit www.popla.co.uk to get started
Grounds for appeal
The grounds under which you can appeal a parking charge notice are:
1. My vehicle was stolen.
2. I wasn’t improperly parked.
3. The amount requested on the parking charge notice isn’t correct.
4. I wasn’t the driver or the registered keeper of the vehicle at the time of the alleged
improper parking (not valid for Scotland or Northern Ireland appeals)
5. Extreme circumstances prevented me from parking correctly.
6. Other
How to appeal to POPLA
Once you’ve appealed directly to the Operator about your Parking Charge Notice, they’ll give
you a 10-digit verification code that enables you to bring your appeal to us. You must use
this within 28 days of the date of the Operator’s rejection notice.
The quickest and easiest way to submit your appeal is online at www.popla.co.uk. The
benefits to submitting your appeal online include:
The process begins immediately and takes 15 minutes.
You can manage and track the status of your appeal online.
You’re able to instantly upload supporting information and view what the Operator
submits.
You’ll get a faster decision.
Reduce your carbon footprint by going paperless.
If you’d prefer to submit your appeal to us by post, please use the enclosed form. The
completed form and copies (not originals) of all supporting information (i.e. photographs or
documents) need to reach us within 28 days of the Operator issuing their notice of rejection.
We recommend getting a certificate of posting when you send your submission. Please be
aware that nothing you send us can be returned.
Late appeals can only be considered in exceptional circumstances, at the Assessors
discretion. We’ll need you to include a clear explanation of why your appeal is late, either on
the form or on a separate sheet. We’ll also need copies of any supporting information, the
Operator’s rejection notice, and the envelope it was in (if it was posted).
Appeals about parking charges issued in Scotland or Northern Ireland
We can now accept appeals relating to Parking Charge Notices issued in Scotland and
Northern Ireland, if you’re:
The driver of the vehicle and the person who received the Parking Charge Notice, or
Appealing on behalf of the driver who received the Parking Charge Notice.
If you’re appealing on behalf of the driver/ registered keeper, please include a letter from
them authorising you to act on their behalf.
If you require additional help and support
We’re happy to provide additional support to anybody who needs it. Please contact us by
phone where you’d find that helpful.
-
I've literally just copied and pasted the letter from Parking Eye with the additional Popla process, but here is the just the ParkingEye response.
This is the main part of the letter:
Parkingeye Ltd, PO Box 117, Blyth, NE24 9EJ
02 June 2025
Reference: Parking Charge Notice - 588456/770105
POPLA Ref: 6061535201
Dear Sir / Madam,
We are writing in relation to the Parking Charge incurred on 01 April 2025 at 00:29, at
McDonald's Crossbush Service Station, Littlehampton car park.
Parkingeye have previously requested further evidence in response to the appeal that
was submitted and provided 28 days for this to be sent to us. The 28-day period has now
passed, and we are not in receipt of any further correspondence or evidence to confirm
that the terms were not breached.
Parkingeye are a member of the British Parking Association and can confirm that there is
adequate signage outlining the terms and conditions at this site.
We are writing to advise you that your appeal has been unsuccessful and that you have
now reached the end of our internal appeals procedure.
If you wish to have your case independently assessed, please be advised, there is an
independent appeals service (POPLA) which is available to motorists who have had an
appeal rejected by a British Parking Association Approved Operator. Contact information
and further information can be found enclosed. See also www.popla.co.uk
By law we are also required to inform you that Ombudsman Services (www.ombudsmanservices.org/) provides an alternative dispute resolution service that would be competent
to deal with your appeal. However, we have not chosen to participate in their alternative
dispute resolution service. As such should you wish to appeal then you must do so to
POPLA, as explained above.
Please note, if the Parking Charge was issued in Scotland/Northern Ireland, only the
driver can appeal to POPLA (Parking on Private Land Appeals).
As a gesture of goodwill, we have extended the discount period for a further 14 days from
the date of this correspondence. If you appeal to POPLA, you will not be able to pay the
discounted amount in settlement of the Parking Charge, and the full value of the charge
will be outstanding. In addition, if your appeal to POPLA is unsuccessful, you will no
longer be able to pay the discounted amount and the full value of the charge will be due.
A payment can be made by telephoning 0330 555 4444, by visiting
www.parkingeye.co.uk/payments or alternatively by posting a cheque/postal order to
Parkingeye Ltd, PO Box 117, Blyth, NE24 9EJ. Please ensure you write your reference
number on the reverse of any cheque/postal order so the payment can be allocated.
Parkingeye Limited, 40 Eaton Avenue, Buckshaw Village, Chorley, PR7 7NA, Registered in England, Registration No. 5134454
If you have received this correspondence via email, please allow 24 hours for our
systems to reflect the discounted value before making a payment via our automated
payment line or website.
Yours faithfully,
Parkingeye Team
-
That’s virtually unreadable, can you do something to fix this?
-
Hello again,
I have received the expected response from ParkingEye with the Popla reference number and could really do with some help on next steps if possible. A copy of the response is below, naturally offering us a 'final chance' to pay the 'reduced' parking fine of £60 if paid within the next 14 days.
I apologise if this has been answered before but what do I need to do next? I do not want to get any part of this wrong, and give these people any wriggle room. My son is prepared to hold out, but I have to do all the writing and emailing as he is unable to manage this.
Parkingeye Ltd, PO Box 117, Blyth, NE24 9EJ
02 June 2025
Reference: Parking Charge Notice - 588456/770105
POPLA Ref: 6061535201
Dear Sir / Madam,
We are writing in relation to the Parking Charge incurred on 01 April 2025 at 00:29, at
McDonald's Crossbush Service Station, Littlehampton car park.
Parkingeye have previously requested further evidence in response to the appeal that
was submitted and provided 28 days for this to be sent to us. The 28-day period has now
passed, and we are not in receipt of any further correspondence or evidence to confirm
that the terms were not breached.
Parkingeye are a member of the British Parking Association and can confirm that there is
adequate signage outlining the terms and conditions at this site.
We are writing to advise you that your appeal has been unsuccessful and that you have
now reached the end of our internal appeals procedure.
If you wish to have your case independently assessed, please be advised, there is an
independent appeals service (POPLA) which is available to motorists who have had an
appeal rejected by a British Parking Association Approved Operator. Contact information
and further information can be found enclosed. See also www.popla.co.uk
By law we are also required to inform you that Ombudsman Services (www.ombudsmanservices.org/) provides an alternative dispute resolution service that would be competent
to deal with your appeal. However, we have not chosen to participate in their alternative
dispute resolution service. As such should you wish to appeal then you must do so to
POPLA, as explained above.
Please note, if the Parking Charge was issued in Scotland/Northern Ireland, only the
driver can appeal to POPLA (Parking on Private Land Appeals).
As a gesture of goodwill, we have extended the discount period for a further 14 days from
the date of this correspondence. If you appeal to POPLA, you will not be able to pay the
discounted amount in settlement of the Parking Charge, and the full value of the charge
will be outstanding. In addition, if your appeal to POPLA is unsuccessful, you will no
longer be able to pay the discounted amount and the full value of the charge will be due.
A payment can be made by telephoning 0330 555 4444, by visiting
www.parkingeye.co.uk/payments or alternatively by posting a cheque/postal order to
Parkingeye Ltd, PO Box 117, Blyth, NE24 9EJ. Please ensure you write your reference
number on the reverse of any cheque/postal order so the payment can be allocated.
Parkingeye Limited, 40 Eaton Avenue, Buckshaw Village, Chorley, PR7 7NA, Registered in England, Registration No. 5134454
If you have received this correspondence via email, please allow 24 hours for our
systems to reflect the discounted value before making a payment via our automated
payment line or website.
Yours faithfully,
Parkingeye Team
POPLA administered by The Ombudsman Service Limited
Registered Office: POPLA, PO Box 1270, Warrington, WA4 9RL. Registered in England and Wales.
Company registration number: 4351294 VAT registration number: 798 3441 79
The quickest and easiest way to submit your
appeal is online. This usually takes 15 minutes.
Simply visit www.popla.co.uk to get started.
Grounds for appeal
The grounds under which you can appeal a parking charge notice are:
1. My vehicle was stolen.
2. I wasn’t improperly parked.
3. The amount requested on the parking charge notice isn’t correct.
4. I wasn’t the driver or the registered keeper of the vehicle at the time of the alleged
improper parking (not valid for Scotland or Northern Ireland appeals)
5. Extreme circumstances prevented me from parking correctly.
6. Other
How to appeal to POPLA
Once you’ve appealed directly to the Operator about your Parking Charge Notice, they’ll give
you a 10-digit verification code that enables you to bring your appeal to us. You must use
this within 28 days of the date of the Operator’s rejection notice.
The quickest and easiest way to submit your appeal is online at www.popla.co.uk. The
benefits to submitting your appeal online include:
The process begins immediately and takes 15 minutes.
You can manage and track the status of your appeal online.
You’re able to instantly upload supporting information and view what the Operator
submits.
You’ll get a faster decision.
Reduce your carbon footprint by going paperless.
If you’d prefer to submit your appeal to us by post, please use the enclosed form. The
completed form and copies (not originals) of all supporting information (i.e. photographs or
documents) need to reach us within 28 days of the Operator issuing their notice of rejection.
We recommend getting a certificate of posting when you send your submission. Please be
aware that nothing you send us can be returned.
Late appeals can only be considered in exceptional circumstances, at the Assessors
discretion. We’ll need you to include a clear explanation of why your appeal is late, either on
the form or on a separate sheet. We’ll also need copies of any supporting information, the
Operator’s rejection notice, and the envelope it was in (if it was posted).
POPLA administered by The Ombudsman Service Limited
Registered Office: POPLA, PO Box 1270, Warrington, WA4 9RL. Registered in England and Wales.
Company registration number: 4351294 VAT registration number: 798 3441 79
Appeals about parking charges issued in Scotland or Northern Ireland
We can now accept appeals relating to Parking Charge Notices issued in Scotland and
Northern Ireland, if you’re:
The driver of the vehicle and the person who received the Parking Charge Notice, or
Appealing on behalf of the driver who received the Parking Charge Notice.
If you’re appealing on behalf of the driver/ registered keeper, please include a letter from
them authorising you to act on their behalf.
If you require additional help and support
We’re happy to provide additional support to anybody who needs it. Please contact us by
phone where you’d find that helpful.
POPLA administered by The Ombudsman Service Limited
Registered Office: POPLA, PO Box 1270, Warrington, WA4 9RL. Registered in England and Wales.
Company registration number: 4351294 VAT registration number: 798 3441 79
Grounds for Appeal and Supporting Evidence
Providing evidence can help to support your case. When completing the form, please only
select genuine grounds for appeal. Most successful parking appeals are made on the
following four grounds:
1. My car was stolen
Your vehicle was improperly parked after being
stolen.
This doesn’t include circumstances where the
vehicle owner has given another person (e.g. a
friend or family member) permission to drive their
vehicle.
The fact that you told the driver they could only
use your vehicle if they didn’t get a parking ticket
is not grounds for appeal.
Supporting evidence may include:
A valid Crime Reference Number
Police reports
2. I wasn’t improperly parked
The vehicle wasn’t parked where the parking notice
said it was.
You were still within the time you paid for.
You didn’t overstay the free parking allowed in the car
park.
You paid the correct amount for parking.
Your car parking ticket was clearly displayed.
The terms and conditions of the car park weren’t
properly signed.
You were parked in an area where you were free to
park.
You complied with the terms and conditions on the
signage.
Supporting evidence may include:
Evidence of payment, such as your parking ticket.
4. I was not the driver or registered keeper
at the time (not valid for Scotland or
Northern Ireland appeals)
You bought the vehicle after the alleged improper
parking.
You sold the vehicle before the alleged improper
parking.
You hired a car but weren’t the hirer at the time of the
alleged improper parking.
You weren’t the driver at the time of the alleged
improper parking.
You provided the drivers details, but the parking
operator continued to pursue you.
Supporting evidence may include:
A copy of the V5C for the vehicle
A copy of your hire agreement
A copy of your communication with the parking
operator informing them of the driver’s details
4
3. The amount requested on the
parking charge notice is incorrect
You’ve already paid your parking charge.
You’re being asked to pay the wrong amount.
Supporting evidence may include:
Evidence that you’ve paid your parking charge
and the date you paid.
Evidence to demonstrate why you believe the
parking charge is incorrect.
POPLA administered by The Ombudsman Service Limited
Registered Office: POPLA, PO Box 1270, Warrington, WA4 9RL. Registered in England and Wales.
Company registration number: 4351294 VAT registration number: 798 3441 79
Further Information
POPLA (Parking on Private Land Appeals) is the UK’s largest private parking appeals
scheme, handling appeals about parking operators that belong to the British Parking
Association (BPA). Since 2015, POPLA has been operated by independent, not-for-profit
dispute resolution business, Flexible Resolution Services.
Our role is to review the information and evidence provided, to make an impartial decision on
whether a parking charge notice has been issued correctly.
We consider appeals against relevant parking charge notices issued in England and Wales.
We’re also able to consider relevant parking charges issued in Scotland and Northern
Ireland where the person appealing has received a parking charge notice and is the driver.
Receive your verification number.
When a Parking Operator rejects a motorist’s appeal, they should send a 10-digit verification
code with their rejection notice, enabling the motorist to use the POPLA service. If it’s not
been provided, you should request this from the Operator.
Prepare to share your evidence.
Providing additional information and copies of evidence can help to support a successful
appeal. This might include: a crime reference number (if the vehicle was stolen),
photographs (if you think the signage was inadequate), your pay and display voucher (if you
say it was displayed and had not expired) or any witness statements if applicable.
Submit your appeal.
Once you’ve completed the form and copied any supporting evidence, you can submit your
appeal by post. We must receive this within 28 days of the Operator issuing their rejection
notice. Please get a certificate of posting when you send it.
The Assessor will consider all of the information and evidence provided by both parties
alongside the BPA Code of Practice to determine whether your appeal should be allowed or
refused.
If the Assessor determines that you’re liable for the parking charge, they’ll refuse your
appeal. Conversely, if they determine that you’re not liable for it, they’ll allow your appeal.
About us
How the appeal process works
Our decision
-
Yes, Subject Access Request was sent to them on 14th April and they replied:
Dear Ms X,
We thank you for your correspondence.
Please be advised that your full Subject Access Request has been received and we can confirm that this will be issued within the applicable timeframe as per our GDPR obligations.
For further information about your rights as a data subject, plus information about the categories of data we process, data transfers, the legal basis for our processing, and the purposes of processing, please visit: https://www.parkingeye.co.uk/privacy-policy/
Yours sincerely,
Parkingeye Privacy Team
-
Please remind us, was SAR sent to ParkingEye?
-
I have had another response from Parking Eye Privacy Team that I assume is meant to boggle you into some kind of submission.
Thought I would share. And all this for overstaying in a MacDonalds car park for 20 minutes at midnight on a weekday evening!
Parking Charge Ref: 588456/770105
Dear X,
We write further to your recent correspondence. We note from this that you have submitted a Request for Access pursuant to Article 15 of the UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR).
We wish to confirm that the response provided below, and via the enclosed documents, concerns the Parking Charge referenced above. This data is provided on the basis that we note that Mr X has already been identified as the registered keeper of the vehicle in question in relation to the date of 01/04/2025 and therefore we can be satisfied, to the standard required, that the data collected and processed in respect of that vehicle on that date is personal data pertaining to him.
We can confirm that Mr X’s name and address were provided by the DVLA on 04/04/2025. This data was provided as Mr X was identified as the registered keeper of vehicle XXX in respect of a breach of the parking terms and conditions that took place within McDonald's Crossbush Service Station, Littlehampton on 01/04/2025.
Parkingeye can confirm that we issued a total of 5 items of correspondence to date prior to any further recovery or legal action. The address used was the address as held by the DVLA for the Registered Keeper of the vehicle on the date of the parking event.
Please note, it is Parkingeye’s position that this charge was issued following a contractual breach of the terms and conditions in operation onsite, and that we had reasonable cause to request the Registered Keeper’s details from the DVLA. Please note that our lawful bases for processing data are Performance of a Contract and Legitimate Interests. Parkingeye do not rely on Consent as a legal basis for processing data when issuing and pursuing the payment of outstanding Parking Charges. We are registered with the ICO to collect and process data for the purpose of car park management, which includes dealing with appeals and any subsequent recovery action required.
In order to enforce the parking contract where a breach has been identified and to support legitimate interests, data may be shared with other organisations. We can confirm that this could include data being shared with tracing and collection agents if a Parking Charge remains outstanding.
Please be advised that all personal data we act in the capacity of controller of, is both stored and backed up in the UK. Images and vehicle registration marks (VRMs) may be accessed by our agents in India as they undertake a percentage of our manual quality checks prior to a Parking Charge being issued, and deal with a percentage of motorist appeals. However, this access is remote. We can confirm that we have implemented and ensured the safeguards required by data protection law in respect of sharing data outside the European Economic Area. Parkingeye are also accredited with security certification appropriate for the nature of the data that we process in circumstances like this.
Parkingeye have a data retention policy and ensure that all images and data are only stored for as long as is necessary. Retention periods vary in each circumstance depending on the status of a charge or any action that has been taken. Parkingeye can confirm that the data obtained is not kept on our system any longer than is entirely necessary.
We can also confirm, in line with s.(1)(h) of Article 15, that no automated decision-making or profiling, referred to in Article 22(1) and (4), has been undertaken in relation to personal data in this case. We note that Article 22 states as follows, “The data subject shall have the right not to be subject to a decision based solely on automated processing, including profiling, which produces legal effects concerning him or her or similarly significantly affects him or her”. We can confirm that you have not been subject to such a decision and that the processing falls outside the scope of Article 22. Any automated checks undertaken by Parkingeye in relation to ANPR data will only result in a decision not to issue a Parking Charge. Should the ANPR data we process indicate that a breach of the parking terms and conditions has taken place, any subsequent decision to issue a Parking Charge will require that data to pass through a substantial checking process that includes human intervention.
Please note that the UK General Data Protection Regulation provides the following further rights:
• The right to request from Parkingeye access, rectification or erasure of your personal data;
• The right to request from Parkingeye restriction of processing of your personal data;
• The right to object to the processing of your personal data.
Please note that some of these rights are not absolute and will only apply in certain circumstances. We will review each request we receive in respect of these rights. We do not have to agree with a request but if we refuse, we will still contact the data subject within one month to explain why. You also have the right to lodge a complaint with the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). For further information, please refer to the ICO website, www.ico.org.uk. You may also seek a judicial remedy.
For further information about your rights as a data subject, plus information about the categories of data we process, data transfers, the legal basis for our processing, and the purposes of processing, please visit: https://www.Parkingeye.co.uk/privacy-policy/
Yours sincerely,
Parkingeye Privacy Team
I need a lie down now!
Assume I don't need to do anything, just wait for the POPLA code to come through and complain to them.
-
The email address used to send anything is irrelevant. Stop overthinking this. You can send the response suggested or not. Either way, the original appeal will be rejected and you will receive POPLA code.
You will have 33 days from the appeal rejection date to use the POPLA code, which is plenty of time. I suggest you do a search of the forum for other POPLA appeals to see how they are formatted and what is argued in them.
You could even try and put one together yourself and how it here before sending anything. You will receive a critique and advice on what, if anything to amend and why.
Whilst I will be away, I will not be completely out of touch except that I will be 6 hours west of the UK.
-
Yes, you're right, I am trying to work out best responses all round and keeping in mind I am not, as you say, the Registered Keeper but acting on their behalf. It is a minefield!
-
We need to keep in mind that 'Except I'm not[the registered keeper] I am acting on behalf of the Keeper as they are unable to manage dealing with any of this. So that was why I wanted to just double check about using my email address for all correspondence as I can email 'as the Keeper'.
-
“b789” rather than “Karma” I suggest.
-
Karma - I note you will be away for 3-4 weeks from tomorrow and wanted to ask, if it was at all possible, if you could advise me on what to write to POPLA when I get the code through from Parking Eye, as it is likely to come through in your absence?
I have not responded to the email from them as yet. If you think it is better to simply let them send the POPLA code and ignore their email, I shall do that. If it might be better to send them your suggested response, I can get that over to them today.
I am keen to do this 'by the book' and not give them any wriggle room.
-
Thank you Karma. I will be guided by you on what's best if that's okay. Happy to wait for the POPLA or send the above. Whatever you think, in this case, is the most appropriate.
-
As stated above, you do not need to name the driver. You're under no legal obligation to do so.
ParkingEye’s letter even concedes this when they say:
“ParkingEye will be obliged to deal with the representations made in your name.”
That’s precisely what you want: for them to consider the appeal as one from the Keeper, with the driver remaining unidentified.
If you want to respond now rather than wait 28 days for the rejection and POPLA code, you can send this:
Subject: Re: PCN 588456/770105 – Response to Request for Driver Details
Dear ParkingEye,
Thank you for your response dated 2 May 2025.
As already stated, I am the Registered Keeper of the vehicle and I have not identified the driver. I am under no obligation to do so. You are therefore required to consider my representations on that basis.
You have stated that this notice complies with paragraph 9(2)(f) of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. However, your Notice to Keeper fails to comply with paragraph 9(2)(e)(i) of the same Schedule because it does not contain the required statutory invitation to the Keeper to pay. Additionally, the notice was not properly “given” within the required period under paragraph 9(4) due to the misdirection to an outdated address. These defects mean that you cannot rely on Schedule 4 to transfer liability from the driver to the Keeper.
If you do not cancel the charge, I expect to receive a POPLA code without delay so that this matter can be referred for independent adjudication.
Yours,
[Your Name]
On behalf of the Registered Keeper
You can also choose to do nothing and wait for their formal rejection with the POPLA code, which they’ve said will follow after 28 days.
-
Yes, do nothing now.
-
Thank you. So I do nothing at this point apart from wait for the POPLA code to come from them? I want to be absolutely clear on what steps I take and appreciate guidance so I do not make any missteps.
-
That’s the (hard to read as formatted) standard fishing letter from Parking Eye which they use to try and get you to name the driver. Ignore, and your appeal will be rejected but you will get a POPLA code.
Completely normal. They generally reject appeals even if they’re valid because plenty of people then pay up.
-
Hi again - I have had the response from Parking Eye to the appeal and wanted to share it asap as I would be very grateful for help with next steps and how to respond please. I had this sent to my email, with the letter below attached as a PDF and another email with an attached PDF referring to the Privacy Request I put in, as you recommended, and confirming that it had been passed to the Privacy team.
This is the letter responding to the Appeal:
Parkingeye Ltd, PO Box 117, Blyth, NE24 9EJ
02 May 2025
Reference: Parking Charge Notice - 588456/770105
Dear Sir / Madam,
Thank you for your correspondence in relation to the Parking Charge incurred on 01 April
2025 at 00:29, at McDonald's Crossbush Service Station, Littlehampton car park.
We are writing to advise you that your recent appeal has been referred for further
information.
You have stated that you were not the driver of the vehicle at the date and time of the
breach of the terms and conditions of the car park, but you have not indicated who was.
You have already been notified that under section 9(2)(b) of schedule 4 of the Protection
of Freedoms Act 2012 that the driver of the motor vehicle is required to pay this parking
charge in full. As we do not know the driver’s name or current postal address, if you were
not the driver at the time, you should tell us the full name and the current postal
address of the driver.
You are warned that if, after 29 days from the Date of Issue, the parking charge has not
been paid in full and we do not know both the name and current address of the driver, we
have the right to recover any unpaid part of the parking charge from you, the registered
keeper. This warning is given to you under paragraph 9(2)(f) of schedule 4 of the
Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and is subject to our complying with the applicable
conditions under schedule 4 of that Act.
Please note, if you have made or wish to make an appeal on behalf of the driver, and you
do not provide the full name and current postal address of the driver, Parkingeye will be
obliged to deal with the representations made in your name.
Parkingeye have placed this charge on hold for 28 days to enable you to provide the
evidence requested. If this information is not provided within 28 days, the appeal may well
be rejected and a POPLA code provided.
Parkingeye Limited, 40 Eaton Avenue Buckshaw Village, Chorley, PR7 7NA, Registered in England, Registration No. 5134454
Alternatively, payment can be made by telephoning our offices on 0330 555 4444 or by
visiting www.parkingeye.co.uk or by posting a cheque or postal order to ParkingEye Ltd,
PO Box 117, Blyth, NE24 9EJ.
Yours faithfully,
Parkingeye Team
Thank you in advance for your guidance on exactly how to word the response.
-
Hi, yes, I have sent the Appeal in the exact wording above and thank you that note above, that helps to know.
-
Did you post the NTK?
Anyway, from your narrative posted on 12 April:
I went to visit the neighbour yesterday [11 April 2025] as they have had an unexpected short stay in hospital, and was passed the post that had been accumulated over the last 2 weeks since seeing them, none of which should be important as all necessary bodies have been notified of the new address.
There was a PCN from Parking Eye, issue date of 4th April for an event on 1st April which had been sent to the old address.
So, issue date 4 April. Deemed given 8th.
Parking charge event, 1 April.
Therefore IMO it has been given within PoFA timescales and the keeper's got until 6 May to submit any 'appeal'.
-
I am doing this now, exactly as you have so kindly laid out for me and I will keep you informed. Thank you so much.
-
Appealing to ParkingEye’s “better nature” won't yield anything meaningful. They are a data-driven operation that rejects the majority of appeals at the first stage as a matter of routine. The strategy needs to be legally grounded, procedurally robust, and show them that you know how to escalate, and will — especially to POPLA, and potentially beyond.
That said, you’ve now got three solid angles:
1. The Notice to Keeper is not PoFA-compliant, particularly under paragraph 9(2)(e)(i), and it was not properly “given” within the prescribed period.
2. The signage was inadequate, especially for a site that is dark, poorly marked, and operating in the middle of the night.
3. The driver has a disability (ADHD and mental health issues confirmed with a GP) which affected their ability to process and act on the signage, and ParkingEye is bound by the Equality Act 2010 to make reasonable adjustments.
Appeal with the following:
Subject: Appeal – Parking Charge Notice 588456/770105
Dear Appeals Department,
I am submitting this appeal as the Registered Keeper of the vehicle in relation to the above Parking Charge Notice. Your Privacy Team has confirmed receipt of a signed Letter of Authority and has acknowledged that I may correspond on the Keeper’s behalf. Please ensure that all future correspondence is directed to this email address, as the Keeper is unable to manage the matter personally due to a long-standing disability.
The Parking Charge Notice was not received until it was forwarded on from the Keeper’s former address. Although the Keeper had updated their driving licence promptly after moving, they were not aware that the V5C logbook required a separate update. This has since been rectified, and the Privacy Team has confirmed the new address is now on file. The late receipt of the notice rebuts the presumption under paragraph 9(6) of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, and the notice was therefore not “given” within the required 14-day period under paragraph 9(4).
Further, the Notice to Keeper fails to comply with paragraph 9(2)(e)(i) of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. It does not include the mandatory invitation to the Keeper to pay the unpaid charge, which is a statutory requirement in order for liability to transfer from the driver to the Keeper. Because of these procedural defects, ParkingEye cannot rely on PoFA to pursue the Keeper for the charge.
In addition to the above, the signage at the site is not sufficiently clear, particularly at night. The incident occurred between 22:40 and 00:29, in a mostly empty car park attached to a McDonald’s restaurant. There is no obvious way to pay for additional time beyond the 90-minute limit, nor is it clear why a customer of the on-site restaurant — who made a legitimate purchase and remained within the premises — would be expected to monitor the time in such circumstances.
The driver, who remains unnamed, has a diagnosed neurodevelopmental condition (ADHD), along with associated mental health difficulties. These are confirmed and on record with their GP. These conditions affect executive function, time awareness, and attention to environmental detail. The driver was not aware of any signage at the site, as it was dark, the car park was largely empty, and there was no reason to assume that restrictions would apply while consuming a purchased meal on the premises. Given the disability involved, ParkingEye is subject to the duties imposed by the Equality Act 2010 and is required to make reasonable adjustments to its enforcement approach where a protected individual is involved. I am formally raising this as a matter you must consider in the context of this appeal.
For the avoidance of doubt, I am appealing as the Registered Keeper only. The identity of the driver is not being provided, and I am under no obligation to do so. Please do not infer or assume the driver’s identity in any further correspondence.
I request that this charge be cancelled. If you decide not to do so, I expect to be issued with a POPLA code without delay so that the matter can be referred to independent adjudication.
Yours
[Your Name]
On behalf of the Registered Keeper
-
It is tricky. The driver was aware of the sign but simply did not notice the time as there is no clear payment process and even if there was, would not have thought to do so as they were there just enjoying a late night MacDonalds after a long shift at work. Paying for a car park in the middle of nowhere, in the middle of the night, which was empty, and when they were eating a meal they paid for at the same site, just would not have occurred to them. If you can say that is down to their disability (ADHD, mental health issues, all noted with GP), then I can state that. But it is about knowing the best way to word that as these companies don't care, so appealing to their better nature is a waste of time, as we know!
If there is a legal argument I can put forward that will just get them to consider dropping in this instance, especially if they can see that I will keep going and take their time up with arguing against it, then great but I know I need help with that wording if possible.
-
Thank you for the update. That reply from ParkingEye’s Privacy Team confirms that they have accepted the Letter of Authority, updated the address for this specific PCN, and are now corresponding with you.
You say the disability is not a reason for the overstay in this particular case. Do you specifically want to argue that the driver also has a protected condition and it contributed to their time on site?
-
I've had a reply from the Privacy Team at Parkingeye which I assume means I can now do the Appeal but I am just a bit unclear on how best to word this appeal so that it gets across the Letter of Consent has been accepted by the Privacy team, so assume that covers all of Parkingeye correspondence, then reiterating about the disability of the Keeper (which is not necessarily relevant to overstaying in a car park) and being careful not to refer to the Keeper being the Driver. I don't want to get anything wrong at this point, even if this is just going to be buying some time as the Keeper (driver too) is not in a position to pay this damn £60 'invoice'.
This is the reply from Parkingeye privacy team:
Thank you for your email.
We can confirm that we have updated the address in relation to Parking Charge 588456/770105, for clarity should there be any other parking charges issued we would send any correspondence to address as provided by the DVLA.
Please note that this mailbox is for data protection matters only and therefore we are unable to consider appeals or queries submitted via the same.
APPEALS PROCEDURE
Please be advised that appeals are not dealt with via this email address. If you have received a Parking Charge and wish to appeal, please follow the below procedure.
All appeals must be submitted online or to the address detailed below. Appeals should be submitted within 28 days of the delivery of the Parking Charge. Supporting evidence should be attached to assist with an appeal. If the appeal is unsuccessful, you will be advised in writing and you will also be provided with details of the Independent Appeals Service (POPLA), their contact details and a unique appeal reference. Further information on the appeals procedure can be found on the reverse of our initial correspondence or on our website. Please note: POPLA will not accept an appeal if you have not appealed to Parkingeye in the first instance.
Online: www.parkingeye.co.uk/appeal
Or alternatively, please write to: Appeals Department, Parkingeye Ltd, PO Box 117, Blyth, NE24 9EJ
Parkingeye will only accept and respond to appeals in English. Any complaints will need to be sent in writing to the above address. Parkingeye are unable to deal with complaints or appeals via email or telephone.
If you require information pertaining to your personal data, please confirm this and we can assist you further in providing this.
Yours sincerely,
Parkingeye Privacy Team
-
Morning. I thought it might be helpful to share the automated response to the email sent to the Privacy team, in case there is anything in there that can be used or is helpful. Other than that, I am taking your advice and I am going to wait on a response before submitting the appeal (which admittedly, I could do with help on the wording of it if that was not too much to ask).
PLEASE NOTE THIS IS AN AUTOMATED RESPONSE
Thank you for your email.
Please note that this inbox is for privacy related queries only.
Where your query does not concern a privacy matter, we will endeavour to pass your email to the appropriate team, however, you will not receive a response directly from the Privacy Team.
PLEASE SEE BELOW FOR FURTHER INFORMATION ABOUT APPEALS.
If your email does concern a privacy query, the Privacy Team will endeavour to respond to your query at the earliest possible opportunity.
If you are contacting us regarding any of the individual rights provided for within the GDPR (such as the Right of Access (subject access request)), our initial response may not be our final response.
We are required to verify your identity before passing you information and we may need to contact you upon receipt of your query to clarify your request. We will be unable to process your request until we have all required information.
APPEALS PROCEDURE
Please be advised that appeals are not dealt with via this email address. If you have received a Parking Charge and wish to appeal, please follow the below procedure.
All appeals must be submitted online or to the address detailed below. Appeals should be submitted within 28 days of the delivery of the Parking Charge. Supporting evidence should be attached to assist with an appeal. If the appeal is unsuccessful, you will be advised in writing and you will also be provided with details of the Independent Appeals Service (POPLA), their contact details and a unique appeal reference. Further information on the appeals procedure can be found on the reverse of our initial correspondence or on our website.
Please note: POPLA will not accept an appeal if you have not appealed to Parkingeye in the first instance.
Please write to: Appeals Department, Parkingeye, P.O. BOX 117, Blyth, NE24 9EJ.
Online: www.parkingeye.co.uk/appeal
Please find below some of our Frequently Asked Questions which may assist you with your enquiry:
Where can I find my reference number?
The Parking Charge reference number can be found on all correspondence issued by ParkingEye. This is usually located on the top right of the Parking Charge Notice issued. Please be advised, when using the automated payment line, any non-numerical characters within the Parking Charge Reference should be replaced with the star key.
I was not the driver; how can I transfer liability?
Please visit www.parkingeye.co.uk/appeal and select ‘I was not the driver of the vehicle’ as your reason for appeal. Here you will have the opportunity to provide the full details of the driver/hirer. Alternatively you can write to us at our postal address
What is the status of the Parking Charge?
You can view the status of your Parking Charge by clicking here and entering your Parking Charge reference number, along with your vehicle registration. Please note, it may take up to 24 hours for our systems to update after a payment has been made.
How can I pay the Parking Charge?
Payment for the Parking Charge can be made on our website or by calling our automated payment line on 0330 555 4444. Alternatively, a cheque or postal order can also be sent to: ParkingEye, P.O Box 565, Chorley, PR6 6HT. Please ensure you quote your 12-digit reference number on the back of your cheque or postal order to ensure correct allocation.
My Parking Charge was cancelled and I have not received my refund. When will I receive this?
A refund cheque may take up to 28 days to be received. If you are not in receipt of your refund cheque within 28 days, please contact ParkingEye by visiting www.parkingeye.co.uk/appeal or in writing to the postal address above.
I am trying to pay for parking on your car park, how can I do this?
For information on how to pay for parking, please refer to the signage situated within the car park. Please note, ParkingEye do not have the facility to accept any retrospective payments to park and we advise payment is made on the day of parking.
There was an incident involving another vehicle on your car park, how can I get a copy of your CCTV?
It should be noted that ParkingEye operate using ANPR cameras and do not use CCTV. Due to Data Protection regulations, we are only able to supply information to the Police or under a Court Order.
Yours faithfully,
ParkingEye
Parkingeye Limited | 40 Eaton Avenue | Matrix Park | Buckshaw Village | Chorley | PR7 7NA
Registered in England and Wales – No 5134454
-
Thank you. Apologies, I have sent the LoA already and did as you suggest here, got the Keeper to sign it, scanned it, and attached it to a short email saying: Dear Parkingeye Privacy Team,
Please find attached a signed Written Authorisation signed by the Keeper, XX as requested in order to proceed.
Yours faithfully,
I have now just followed that up with the email you kindly laid out above stating the Keeper has a disability and to ensure all correspondence is sent to me.
I assume I await a full response now and can then proceed with the Appeal which I will need to research in the forum for the way to word appropriately. The key defense being that the Keeper is not confirming they were the Driver? Otherwise, I am note sure how else to defend it as they were 19 minutes over the 1.5hrs and there are apparently signs but nothing clear from what the Driver remembers on how to pay should you go over the 1.5 hrs.
-
This reply confirms that they have not yet actioned the Data Rectification Notice (DRN) because they require written authority from the Keeper to deal with you directly. This is a standard but cautious approach under the UK GDPR, and it does not invalidate your DRN — it simply pauses action on it until formal authority is given.
Here is a Letter of Authority template, followed by a suggested cover email you can send to ParkingEye along with the signed LoA, referencing the prior Data Rectification Notice and reiterating the request for reasonable adjustments.
LETTER OF AUTHORITY (to be signed by the Keeper)
To: ParkingEye Ltd
I, [Full Name of Keeper], confirm that I authorise [Your Full Name] to act on my behalf in relation to Parking Charge Notice number [PCN Reference Number]. This includes all communication, appeals, complaints, and correspondence with ParkingEye Ltd and any third parties acting on their behalf.
This authorisation is given because I am unable to manage this matter myself due to my disability.
Please treat this authorisation as valid until further notice.
Signed: ______________________
Name: [Full Name of Keeper]
Address: [Correct and current address of the Keeper]
Date: [Insert Date]
The Keeper should sign this by hand (or digitally if that's all they can manage) and you can scan or attach a photo or PDF of it to your email.
COVER EMAIL TO ACCOMPANY THE LOA
Subject: Re: Data Rectification Request – PCN [insert reference number]
Dear ParkingEye Privacy Team,
Further to my previous email dated [insert date], please find attached a signed Letter of Authority from the Registered Keeper of the vehicle, [Full Name of Keeper], in relation to Parking Charge Notice [insert reference number].
As previously explained, the Keeper is unable to manage correspondence due to a disability and has asked that I act on their behalf.
I now formally reiterate the Data Rectification Notice submitted under Article 16 of the UK GDPR. The address currently held by ParkingEye is no longer valid and must be rectified and replaced with the following:
[Insert correct full postal address]
Furthermore, as a reasonable adjustment under the Equality Act 2010, we request that all future correspondence — including responses to this request, appeal communications, or any enforcement notices — be directed via this email address.
Please confirm that the Keeper’s data has been updated accordingly.
Yours faithfully,
[Your Full Name]
On behalf of: [Full Name of Keeper]
-
I put a Letter of Consent together (similar to the one we had to do for Britannia Parking) and that has been sent to Parkingeye and this response received:
Dear XX,
We thank you for your correspondence.
Please be advised that your full Subject Access Request has been received and we can confirm that this will be issued within the applicable timeframe as per our GDPR obligations.
For further information about your rights as a data subject, plus information about the categories of data we process, data transfers, the legal basis for our processing, and the purposes of processing, please visit: https://www.parkingeye.co.uk/privacy-policy/
Yours sincerely,
Parkingeye Privacy Team
I assume I now wait on the response before going ahead with the Appeal? Just very conscious of the timeframe.
-
I have had a reply from the Parking Eye Privacy Team:
Dear XX,
Thank you for your email.
Please note, we will be unable to provide personal data without signed written authority from the person named on the charge due to Data Protection legislation. Written Authorisation can be sent either via email or by post to the below address.
For further information about your rights as a data subject, plus information about the categories of data we process, data transfers, the legal basis for our processing, and the purposes of processing, please visit: https://www.parkingeye.co.uk/privacy-policy/
Yours sincerely,
Parkingeye Privacy Team
Have I got to get the Keeper to email them from their email address in that case? I wrote the DRN exactly as you outlined, with the additional paragraph about the Keeper requested all future correspondence being directed to this email address (mine).
As they don't have the Keepers email, what is the best course of action at this point? To have the Keeper email with the exact same DRN with an additional Letter of Consent signed by the Keeper attached?
-
Thank you. I have added the above to the bottom of the DRN email now sent. I will hold fire on the Appeal until I have email confirmation about the DRN.
I will keep you up to date on progress and not lose my nerve!
-
Yes, it would be entirely appropriate and advisable to mention the Keeper’s disability in the Data Rectification Notice (DRN) email. This provides a legitimate basis — under both the UK GDPR and the Equality Act 2010 — for requesting that all future correspondence be directed to your email address. It supports the argument that this is a reasonable adjustment, and it also gives context as to why you're acting on the Keeper’s behalf.
Mentioning the disability also helps avoid confusion later if ParkingEye queries why correspondence is being handled by a third party. Importantly, you do not need to go into any detail about the condition itself — a simple and respectful explanation is sufficient.
Here is the final section of the DRN wording adjusted to include that point:
The Keeper also requests that all future correspondence, including any responses to this rectification notice, any appeal, or any further action, be directed to this email address. The Keeper is unable to manage written correspondence or administrative matters independently due to a recognised disability, and I am assisting them with their full knowledge and consent. This request is being made both under Article 16 of the UK GDPR and as a reasonable adjustment in line with the Equality Act 2010.
Please confirm by return that the address has been updated and that all future correspondence will be sent to the corrected postal and email address. If you require a signed Letter of Authority, please let me know and it will be provided. A formal appeal will follow once this data rectification request has been acknowledged and actioned.
-
That's helpful, thank you. As yet, there has not been mention of the Keepers disability. Should that be mentioned in the DRN email that you kindly drafted above and therefore to ensure all correspondence is sent using my email address?
-
The most important rule is that all contact with ParkingEye must be in the name of the Registered Keeper, and must not admit or imply who was driving. Even though you are not the Keeper, you can send correspondence such as a Data Rectification Notice on behalf of the Keeper, provided it is written from the Keeper’s perspective. A signed Letter of Authority is not required at this stage but can be provided later if requested.
It is acceptable for the DRN to be sent from your email address, as long as the content is framed as coming from the Keeper. This is appropriate given the Keeper’s vulnerability and inability to manage the matter directly. The DRN should include a statement that, due to the Keeper’s disability, all future correspondence should be sent via your email address as their appointed point of contact. ParkingEye routinely accept such arrangements and may ask for formal authorisation later, but this does not need to be supplied immediately.
The DRN must confirm that the address ParkingEye used is outdated and that the Keeper did not receive the notice until it was passed on. It must also request that the old address be erased and replaced with the Keeper’s current and correct address for service as required under Article 16 of the UK GDPR. This is a rectification of personal data to ensure that any future correspondence, including appeal outcomes or legal documents, is properly served.
You should ask ParkingEye to confirm in writing that their records have been updated and that all future correspondence will be sent to the corrected address and email. Once you have that confirmation, you can then proceed to submit a formal appeal. It is unlikely that the appeal deadline has expired, since the parking event was on 1st April and the Notice to Keeper was issued on 4th April. The DRN is simply being submitted first to ensure that the forthcoming appeal is not delayed or misdirected.
-
I'm sorry about all these additionals but I want to get each part of the process correct.
I have the email ready to go to the Data Protection Officer of Parking Eye which I plan to send from my email address, so it avoids the complication of the Keeper/Driver not seeing the email and me being able to act on it quickly. I will write 'as the Keeper' and know not to acknowledge the identity of the Driver.
However, in order to lodge the Appeal on the Parking Eye appeals page, the address it has in connection with the PCN reference number is for the old address, so in order to proceed with the Appeal and not delay (as today is the 14 day period, although I do take on board your points above Karma) - I will need to confirm the old address.....is that going to be an issue and something I can then address in the rest of the Appeals form?
I am wary of proceeding on anything without checking with you experts first. I want to ensure all parts of this process are aligned.
Thank you again.
-
Except I'm not, I am acting on behalf of the Keeper as they are unable to manage dealing with any of this. So that was why I wanted to just double check about using my email address for all correspondence as I can email 'as the Keeper'.
On the appeals page for Parking Eye, it asks for Personal Details and there is the drop down option at the top which says 'I am the 'Driver, or Registered Keeper/Driver, or Registered Keeper, Hirer/Lessee or None of the Above' so I am selecting Registered Keeper..... all agree?
-
Anything you do is as the Keeper.
-
Fantastic, thank you. I think I am best to just email from my own email address but as 'the Keeper/driver' so I get the responses. Or would that be a mistake? Should I get the Keeper/driver to email? At this time, Parking Eye do not have any contact details.
-
https://ico.org.uk/ESDWebPages/Entry/Z943106X
dpo@parkingeye.co.uk
-
Hi again, I have gone onto ParkingEye.s Privacy Policy page, which is incredibly long and seems only to give you the option of completing a form asking for your name, email, PCN number, and then your message as a means to contact them rather than the contact details for their Data Protection Officer.
Should I therefore put the contact details of the Keeper/driver and email address and in the message, put your response above or is there something I am missing? I cannot see any other contact details other than to post a letter to the address they put on there.
-
The signage has to be prominent and there are minimum requirements which you can read about in the PPSCoP (https://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/AOS/NEW%20Redesigned%20Documents/sectorsingleCodeofPractice.pdf).
I'll leave you to do your own search of the forum as there are plenty of appeals you which you can use to put together your won. Just show it before you send it so that others can advise on any changes that may be necessary.
Here is a DRN you can adapt which should be sent to the operators Data Protection Officer (DPO) whose details you can find on their privacy policy on their website. You can include a copy of your V5C as proof of identity:
Dear Sir/Madam,
RE: SUBJECT ACCESS REQUEST
I write to make a formal Subject Access Request in respect of my personal information. I am entitled to make this request under data protection laws. The request is made in accordance with section 45 of the Data Protection Act 2018 and Article 15 of the retained EU General Data Protection Regulation 2016/679 (UK GDPR). You can identify my records using the information which is listed below.
Requester (data subject) information
(a). Full name:
(b). Address:
(c). Email address:
(d). Telephone number:
(e). PCN number:
(f). VRM:
Requested information
In accordance with my right of access under data protection law, I request the following:
(a) Copies of my personal data
I request that I am provided with full copies of all personal data relating to me which is held by [Operator name].
I would prefer to receive an electronic copy of the requested information.
(b) Purpose of the processing
Please confirm within your response the purpose (or purposes) for which my personal data was collected by [Operator name] in the first instance and the purpose (or purposes) for which is has been used by [Operator name] to date.
(c) Categories of the data
Please confirm within your response which categories of my personal data have been collected by [Operator name].
(d) Sharing of the data
Please confirm within your response which recipients my personal data has or will be disclosed to. Please also confirm whether my data will be shared outside of the United Kingdom and if so, what safeguards are in place in relation to this.
(e) Storage of the data
Please confirm within your response the retention periods for the storage of my personal data. If you are unable to confirm a specific retention period, please confirm what criteria will be used to determine this.
(f) Source of the data
Please confirm within your response which sources my personal data is collected from.
(g) Details about automated decision-making
Please confirm within your response whether any automated decision-making which uses my personal data is taking place or will take place. If this is the case, I ask that you please provide me with information about the logic involved in any such process and the relevant consequences the decision-making will have upon me.
(h). Existence of my rights
Please acknowledge and confirm within your response my right to request the rectification or erasure of my personal data and the right to object to or request a restriction the processing which is taking place.
Responding to my request
The above contains all necessary information in order for you to process my request and any delay by yourselves will not absolve you from providing me with the information within one calendar month of the date above as this is being sent to you as an attachment by email.
I believe that the information which has been requested should be readily available to you.
This request should not therefore fall within the legal definition of an excessive or manifestly unfounded request and should not attract any processing fee.
I would be grateful for your assistance in processing my request within the required one month period of your receipt.
Yours faithfully,
[your full name]
-
Thank you for laying this all out and explaining the process and yes please to your offer to draft the DRN or the appeal text. I do not want to misstep on any part of this and want to ensure we stick rigidly to your suggestions and instructions as you are clearly the expert and we are learning all the time here!
Do you need photos of both sides of the PCN?
I don't believe I have said the driver said the signs were unclear, just that it was not something that had even crossed their mind because they were the only one in the car park and it was the middle of the night! Not helpful, but that is the truth of it.
Thank you again and I will look out for your response so I can hopefully get this DRN/appeal text off asap.
-
So, to summarise... The Keeper has received a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) from ParkingEye for an alleged overstay of 19 minutes in a McDonald’s car park. The PCN was initially sent to the Keeper’s old address because the V5C had not been updated with the new address at the time ParkingEye requested the data from the DVLA. The notice has only recently come to light after being passed on. You are assisting the Keeper in dealing with this matter, as they are unable to handle it themselves due to disability, including neurodivergent and mental health-related issues.
This is not a fine. It is a private invoice alleging a contractual breach. ParkingEye is seeking to hold the Keeper liable under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA). However, their Notice to Keeper does not fully comply with PoFA. It fails to meet the requirement in paragraph 9(2)(e)(i), which states that the notice must include a specific "invitation" to the Keeper to pay the unpaid parking charge if, after 28 days, the operator does not know the name and address of the driver. Because this required wording is missing, the notice is not PoFA-compliant. That means ParkingEye cannot transfer liability from the unknown driver to the Keeper.
The Keeper must not identify the driver. The operator cannot legally assume that the Keeper and the driver are the same person, and there is no obligation to disclose the driver’s identity. All references to the driver must be made in the third person.
The Keeper has 28 days from the date the notice was received to submit an appeal. This does not mean 28 days from the issue date printed on the notice. Paragraph 9(6) of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 states that a notice sent by post is presumed to have been “given” to the Keeper two working days after it is posted. However, this is a rebuttable presumption. It only applies unless the contrary is proved. In this case, the notice was sent to the Keeper’s old address and was only later passed on after a delay. That delay rebuts the statutory presumption of delivery. The notice cannot be considered “given” until the Keeper actually received it. The 28-day appeal window begins from that actual date of receipt. Although the operator acted lawfully by using the address held by the DVLA at the time, PoFA still requires that the notice be actually “given” to the Keeper within the prescribed period to create liability. If the notice was not received within that time, then the operator cannot rely on PoFA to hold the Keeper liable, even if the delivery failure resulted from the Keeper’s own delay in updating their DVLA record.
The first step is for the Keeper to submit a Data Rectification Notice (DRN) under Article 16 of the UK GDPR. This notice instructs ParkingEye to rectify the Keeper’s personal data by updating the address on file. It must specify that the previous address is no longer valid for service and require confirmation that all future correspondence, including any legal proceedings, will be sent to the new correct address. This protects the Keeper from any claim being sent to the wrong address and potentially resulting in a default County Court Judgment (CCJ).
The Keeper should also submit an appeal, stating that the Notice to Keeper is not PoFA-compliant on two grounds. First, it was not “given” to the Keeper within the time required by paragraph 9(4), because it was sent to an old address and only received much later after being passed on. Although the operator used the address held by the DVLA at the time, the Keeper had only updated their driving licence and was unaware that the vehicle logbook (V5C) required a separate update. This is a common mistake and was corrected as soon as it was discovered. Second, the notice fails to include the statutory invitation required under paragraph 9(2)(e)(i), which means the operator cannot rely on PoFA to transfer liability to the Keeper. Because PoFA has not been complied with, the Keeper cannot be held liable. The appeal may also raise further arguments, including that the signage was unclear, particularly late at night, and that there was no visible or accessible way to pay for extending the stay. The driver, who remains unnamed, has a disability and would be considered a protected person under the Equality Act 2010. As such, the operator has a duty to make reasonable adjustments. These issues should be considered in any fair and lawful enforcement process.
If ParkingEye rejects the appeal, the next step is to submit an appeal to POPLA, the independent adjudication service. As long as the appeal is submitted by the Keeper without revealing the identity of the driver, and the PoFA non-compliance is clearly raised, there is a strong chance the POPLA appeal will be upheld.
If POPLA does not allow the appeal, the case may still not be over. ParkingEye would then typically pass the matter to debt recovery firms, who will send a stream of threatening letters. These letters can safely be ignored. Debt collectors have no enforcement powers and cannot take legal action. If the matter is not resolved at that stage, it may eventually be escalated to a county court claim. This is not something to be feared.
The county court is simply the final stage in the dispute resolution process. In most cases, claims are either struck out or discontinued before a hearing ever takes place. ParkingEye and its legal agents often fail to follow up or proceed properly, especially when a robust defence has been filed. Even in the rare case that the matter proceeds all the way to a hearing, there is still a realistic chance of success for the Keeper, particularly if the PoFA issue is properly raised and the driver has not been identified. The judge will assess the facts and legal compliance of the Notice to Keeper and the signage.
In summary, the Keeper should first issue a Data Rectification Notice to ensure all correspondence goes to the correct address. They should then appeal within 28 days of receiving the notice, arguing that the NtK is not PoFA-compliant and that no Keeper liability can arise. The Keeper should decline name the driver. If the appeal is rejected, escalate to POPLA. If POPLA also rejects the appeal, the Keeper can choose to defend a county court claim if it arises. The process should be managed calmly and methodically. If you require assistance drafting the DRN or the appeal text, let us know.
-
Show us the documents you are talking about, as requested, see also https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/ so that we have something to work with. Both sides, and don’t obscure dates.
You also should provide pictures of the signs if you’re saying that they’re unclear. On the other hand, if the driver couldn’t be bothered to read them properly, it’s less easy to contest here.
-
Thank you for the advice and for the reminder about the V5 address change.
In the the process of updating all necessary parties of the new address, not one of the 4 drivers in the house had even thought about the V5 documents for their vehicles! As you all say, it is very easy to change online and all of the 4 vehicle V5's have now had the address updated, thank you all for this advice as it was a complete oversight.
Regarding the PCN from Parking Eye, I understand that saying 'owner' is irrelevant and the vehicle keeper is the only one who should respond to the PCN (which sadly falls to me doing this for them).
I know the keeper (and driver) simply does not have £60 which I appreciate is also irrelevant but means their view is to 'fight this all the way' but from your combined experiences, what does that look like when the driver did overstay by 19 minutes and there are apparently signs in the car park about the 1.5 hrs? How likely is it that this gets dismissed in your combined experiences with Parking Eye?
I assume the next steps we would need to take is to go online and register an appeal but how would we need to word the appeal when it is clear the vehicle overstayed by 19 minutes due to the photos of it arriving and then leaving?
These parking companies are parasites and I really don't want another one to get the better of me but would appreciate some guidance on this asap as the 14 day period of paying the 'discounted' £60 comes to an end on 14th April!
What would be the recommended response to Parking Eye Appeals Department in this instance? I do not want to get any wording incorrect and leave the driver vulnerable. I would have to (help) fill out the appeal for the Keeper/Driver and make it clear in there that they are unable to manage dealing with any responses themselves and would need any further correspondence to be dealt with by me, which would require a Letter of Consent being arranged by ParkingEye, signed by the Keeper and then I can act on their behalf. This is where I start losing the will to live a bit. Yet more time spent dealing with these parasitic organisations.
If we fight it, is there a chance it is dropped or is it simply a delaying tactic for a PCN that can be pushed through, end up in court, and still have to be paid?
-
AS already stated above, updating your drivers licence has nothing whatsoever to do with the V5C registration document. Yes, you must update that too and can easily be done online in a matter of minutes. However, that will not help your current situation as the parking operator can only make a single DVLA request for data and the have used that up.
You waffle on about the "owner". That is a totally irrelevant term and as an entity, has no legal meaning in the context of a contractual dispute. The only entities that matter are the Keeper and the Driver.
The Parking Charge Notice (PCN) is not a "fine" and referring to it as such, especially of you use that term in any correspondence highlights you as a "mug" ripe for the picking. A PCN is simply a speculative invoice for an alleged breach of contract by the driver.
The operator has no idea of the identity of the driver unless the Keeper blabs it to them, inadvertently or otherwise. Whilst ParkingEye claim to rely on PoFA 2012 to be able to hold the Keeper liable if the drivers identity is not revealed, their postal Notice to Keeper (NtK) is not fully compliant with all the requirements of the Act and you are advised that the Keeper should not identify the driver.
Any comms about this should only be from the Keeper. They should only refer to the driver in the third party. No "I did this or that. Only "the driver did this or that".
Imagining that this can simply be ignored is wrong. Mentioning that "the owner" was not driving at the time is just another marker that you are not fully au fait with how to refer to anything. As already mentioned, "owner" is irrelevant. There is no official register of "owners". If you're referring to the registered keeper, then look very carefully as the front of the V5C and read what is stated very clearly in bold capital lettering on the front about "ownership".
So, the Keeper has received a postal NtK for a 19 minute overstay at a McDonald's. They are obliged to allow a 10 minute grace period at the end of any contractual parking period, which, even if fully used, leaves the driver having overstayed by at least 9 minutes. Whilst you may think this is de minimis, should it ever go all the way to court, a judge will only consider the facts. The fact is that the driver overstayed and therefore breached the contract.
I did mention that the NtK was not fully compliant with all the requirements of PoFA. This is an arguable defence point should it ever get as far as a hearing in court (unlikely but remotely possible). If it can be proved that their NtK is not fully compliant with all the requirements of PoFA, then they cannot hold the Keeper liable.
As the Keeper is under no legal obligation to identify the driver to an unregulated private parking company, they would have nowhere else to go with this as they are not allowed to infer or presume that the Keeper must also be the driver, even on the balance of probability.
So, armed with the above knowledge, do you intend to fight this all the way, as is the most likely outcome?
-
If ignored, Parking Eye may initiate proceedings against the registered keeper, using the old address, which may result in a default judgement in their favour, after which an effort will be made to trace the keeper at the new address.
I’m not saying you should pay, because so far you’ve not given us anything to go on, but ignoring could end up costing >>£60.
-
The sign will likely say that the driver agrees to pay £100 if the driver overstays, there is no other way of paying for additional time, it is a contract that the driver enters into by reading the signs and by parking, and the registered keeper has now been invoiced for payment under the contract entered into.
If the signs are not clear, an argument can be made that the contract can’t be enforced, for example.
The principle of invoicing for payment for an overstay has been tested and found to be legal, but if you can provide more details then there may be things which mean you don’t have to pay. But moaning that it’s unfair won’t be one of them!
-
We`re the VR document address updated as well as driving licence?
The £100 may seem ridiculous, but this is the usual thing.
Do not ignore this issue.
Post a copy of the PPN with personal details redacted, but leave dates.
-
Think about it.
A driving license has nothing to do with a car, it’s for a person.
A car has a V5C document with the registered keeper’s address, and if you don’t update this any queries about the car will be directed to the old address.
For now, update the V5C because it’s theoretically a fine for not doing so, although it’s never enforced.
-
My family moved house in February and all drivers in the household have updated the DVLA with the new address and received up to date driving licences, all within a month of moving.
There has been an arrangement with the new owner of our previous house that any post still received would be passed over to our old neighbour.
I went to visit the neighbour yesterday as they have had an unexpected short stay in hospital, and was passed the post that had been accumulated over the last 2 weeks since seeing them, none of which should be important as all necessary bodies have been notified of the new address.
There was a PCN from Parking Eye, issue date of 4th April for an event on 1st April which had been sent to the old address.
The PCN is for an overstay of 19 minutes in a local MacDonalds car park which states at the entrance a maximum stay of 1.5 hours. However, it is not immediately clear on the signage at the entrance what happens if you stay over 1.5 hrs and where and how you can pay for any additional stay. A photo of the VCN shows it arriving at 22:40 and leaving at 00:29. I have attached a photo of the back of the PCN for reference.
The driver, who has neurodivergency and mental health issues, is unable to deal with this themselves so it falls upon me. They would prefer to ignore the notice, especially as it can easily be claimed it was never received as there is no official arrangement with the post office to forward any post and if there had been it would only have been for a month and that would have passed by now anyway. I have to be honest, I am feeling that way too.
If no acknowledgement of the PCN is made, and no admission that it was the owner of the vehicle driving at the time, can Parking Eye get anywhere with pursuing this?
I have only just managed to resolve another case on behalf of the driver with Britannia Parking and had only found this site/forum after engaging with Britannia Parking and appealing the fines.
Is it possible to ignore this one as we can easily claim it was never received? How far does Parking Eye go? If there is no obvious way to pay for additional parking over the 1.5 hrs, what happens? To demand £100 (£60 if paid within 14 days) for an overstay is ridiculous.
What if the driver had overstayed due to illness or issues with the car (both possible and has happened), if Parking Eye were to pursue and actually write to the driver at the updated address, what would be the best response?
The help I received with the Britannia Parking fines was invaluable. For this one, I am loathe to pay anything to this Parking Eye, (especially as the driver is already paying a monthly plan to Britannia Parking of £20 per month!) and want to get the approach right from the outset.
Thoughts and advice would be gratefully received.