1
Private parking tickets / Re: Spring Parking PCN - Not displaying valid pay and display ticket - Hillgates Car Park, Bradgate Park LE7 7HQ
« on: February 16, 2026, 01:44:32 pm »
POPLA assement-
Decision: Successful
Assessor Name: Natalie Matthews
Assessor summary of operator case
The operator has issued the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) for not displaying a valid pay and display ticket.
Assessor summary of your case
I can see the appellant raised multiple grounds of appeals. However, for this decision, I will focus my decision on this point: • They weren’t the driver and as this is a Notice to Driver, they will not provide the driver’s details.
Assessor supporting rational for decision
I have allowed the PCN for the following reason: After reviewing the evidence provided by the appellant and operator, I am not satisfied that the driver has been identified. The PCN that was issued was a Notice to Driver attached to the vehicle on the day in question. The operator have not issued an NTK. Within the appeal to the operator and POPLA, I can see that the appellant has not stated that they were driving on the date in question. Based on this, I am not satisfied the operator have identified the driver on the date in question. I am not satisfied that based upon the appeal to POPLA the appellant was the driver. Upon reviewing the rejection letter, it appears the operator is chasing the appellant. As the operator has not issued a Notice to Keeper, then only the driver can be held liable. As such, I must allow the appeal on the basis that the operator has failed to demonstrate that the appellant is the driver and therefore liable for the charge. I note the appellant has submitted different grounds of appeal, however as I have allowed the appeal, then I have not considered these. Accordingly, I must allow this appeal.
Decision: Successful
Assessor Name: Natalie Matthews
Assessor summary of operator case
The operator has issued the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) for not displaying a valid pay and display ticket.
Assessor summary of your case
I can see the appellant raised multiple grounds of appeals. However, for this decision, I will focus my decision on this point: • They weren’t the driver and as this is a Notice to Driver, they will not provide the driver’s details.
Assessor supporting rational for decision
I have allowed the PCN for the following reason: After reviewing the evidence provided by the appellant and operator, I am not satisfied that the driver has been identified. The PCN that was issued was a Notice to Driver attached to the vehicle on the day in question. The operator have not issued an NTK. Within the appeal to the operator and POPLA, I can see that the appellant has not stated that they were driving on the date in question. Based on this, I am not satisfied the operator have identified the driver on the date in question. I am not satisfied that based upon the appeal to POPLA the appellant was the driver. Upon reviewing the rejection letter, it appears the operator is chasing the appellant. As the operator has not issued a Notice to Keeper, then only the driver can be held liable. As such, I must allow the appeal on the basis that the operator has failed to demonstrate that the appellant is the driver and therefore liable for the charge. I note the appellant has submitted different grounds of appeal, however as I have allowed the appeal, then I have not considered these. Accordingly, I must allow this appeal.