Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Private parking tickets => Topic started by: sooty12113 on October 24, 2025, 06:55:21 am
-
Many thanks, I'll follow the advice.
-
Well, you certainly don't pay it. The POPLA decision is not binding on you. What you now do is ignore all debt recovery letters. Debt collectors are powerless to do anything except to try and intimidate the low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree into paying out of ignorance and fear.
Come back when you eventually receive a Letter of Claim (LoC) which will be issued by DCB Legal (not DCBL) and we will advise from there. You can do a forum search for any other ECP claim to see the process.
Eventually they will issue a claim and you will defend using the template defence we provide. In due course the claim will either be struck out or discontinued just before they have to pay the £27 trial fee.
-
I've now received the POPLA adjudication as advised they have rejected my appeal even though they acknowledge I paid for the parking, this is the response, advice on next steps appreciated
Decision
Unsuccessful
Assessor Name
Assessor summary of operator case
The parking operator says the appellant parked without buying a valid ticket or permit.
Assessor summary of your case
The appellant appeals on the following grounds: • Their credit card statement shows they paid for an hour’s parking. • The parking operator claimed there was no payment against their registration whilst also quoting the time of their transaction and the first part of their registration. • There’s no evidence they didn’t display their ticket. The appellant has provided the following evidence: • A copy of a credit card statement showing their payment. Having seen the parking operator’s response to their appeal, the appellant expands on their original appeal grounds.
Assessor supporting rational for decision
The parking operator has provided photos of signs on the car park which make clear users must pay for parking against their full registrations. Signs also make clear £75 charges will be issued for breaking the parking terms. The parking operator has also provided photos showing the appellant’s vehicle was on the car park for just over an hour on the date in question. The payment list from the relevant period has also been provided, and there’s no payment logged against the appellant’s vehicle’s full registration, XXXXXXX. A payment does appear against part of the vehicle’s registration, “XXXX”, so the operator’s case is that the appellant broke the terms by parking without valid payment.
The appellant appeals on the basis their credit card statement shows they paid for an hour’s parking. They’ve provided a copy of the statement. They say the parking operator claimed there was no payment against their registration whilst also quoting the time of their transaction and the first part of their registration. I accept the appellant made a payment, but it’s clear from the evidence referenced above that the payment was invalid because it wasn’t made against the appellant’s vehicle’s full registration. I accept the appellant didn’t deliberately make invalid payment, but the payment list shows that almost all payments made during the relevant period were made against full registrations, with the appellant’s payment seemingly one of only a few exceptions, so I’m satisfied the machine was working correctly.
The parking operator is a member of the British Parking Association’s (BPA) Approved Operator Scheme (AOS) and must follow the associated Code of Practice. Annex F of the Code says that when users break parking terms in specific mitigating circumstances then parking operators should offer at the first appeal stage to reduce charges to no more than £20 for 14 days. One of the circumstances warranting reductions is when users pay for parking against incorrect registrations, like in this case, and I can see the operator offered to reduce this charge. The appellant advises there’s no evidence they didn’t display their ticket. It’s clear the charge was issued because the appellant made invalid payment against an incomplete registration rather than because they failed to display a ticket. The evidence shows that the car park’s terms were made clear, and that the appellant broke them by parking without valid payment. I’m satisfied the charge was issued correctly and I’m refusing this appeal.
-
Yes I expect so, there must be something amiss for 12 drivers in one morning not inputting their full registration number though
-
It’s often the case that the car park operator does it “for free” and does not get a penny of the money people pay for parking, in return for which they get to trouser all the money people pay in parking charges for breaking their rules. Therefore they couldn’t care less whether or not you paid £1, but they care that you broke their rules and they can pursue you for money.
-
Thanks btw, I'll follow the advice on here going to forward
-
Yes I suppose I may have messed up by admitting I was the driver but this was because I knew I had proof of payment with my credit card bill, thinking that would be the end of it
-
Gosh that's a blast from the past, I worked at the Brocket Arms when I was 16.
-
Besides the fact that you SNAFU'd this by admitting being the driver, you have almost zero chance of being successful at POPLA. You should still rebut their evidence but don't hold your breath.
If/when POPLA reject your appeal... so what? Their decision is not binding on you and you do not pay. If you follow the advice you now receive, you will not be paying a penny to ECP.
This will be won after they issue a county court claim through DCB Legal (not DCBL) and eventually they discontinue. Have a read of any of the countless other ECP threads on this forum to see how they are dealt with.
-
Click on the link for the requested details
https://1drv.ms/b/c/9dc1481d76d9c904/EfGPK9uinfhAnQJ0Y73-QJ4BzM4UCHVL2awOdvR610ohDg
-
Please post up the PCN, your appeal, and the rejection.
-
Hi all
Back in August I entered a pub car park in Wigan, according to photographs from ECP on the PCN I entered at 08:47 and left at 09:48. Europarks issued a PCN with the contravention "no valid pay and display/permit was purchased"
I responded by proving the £1 payment for a 1 hours parking by sending a copy of my credit card bill, this also confirmed the payment was made at 08:50. I assumed the charge began from then as I needed time to find a parking space.
Europarks responded by stating "your appeal states you purchased a pay and display ticket however after checking the providers audit reports there are no transactions for the vehicle registration mark that would indicate a major keying error when purchasing a pay and display ticket"
They provided an extract from the machine report showing my payment at 08:50, but which only cited the first four digits of my registration number and therefore claimed payment, stating if I still wished to challenge go to POPLA.
I did this and ECP have responded via POPLA still seeking payment but in support have provided a full list of vehicles (first 4 digits of registration number) matching payments that didn't match the duration of the parking. Providing a photograph of a parking sign stating "please ensure you enter your full and correct vehicle registration mark" You can see from the screenshot that 12 other drivers only provided the first four digits of their registration mark.
I can't believe so many people would make the same apparent mistake as me (I can't remember) of only entering the first four digits of the registration number and there must have been a fault with the machine or misleading information on the machine (no photograph of that is provided) so I intend to respond to POPLA along those lines.
Before I do does anyone have any advice or suggestions.
Thanks
Sooty