Free Traffic Legal Advice

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.

I had the following response from the Adjudicator, further advice appreciated.


"The Appellant should understand that the Adjudicator is not in a position to give legal advice to either of the parties but they are entitled to seek their own independent legal advice. The Adjudicator's role is to consider whether or not the parking charge has a basis in law and was properly issued in the circumstances of each individual case. In all Appeals the Adjudicator is bound by the relevant law applicable at the time and is only able to consider legal challenges and not factual mistakes nor extenuating or mitigating circumstances. Throughout this appeal the Operator has had the opportunity consider all points raised and could have conceded the appeal at any stage. The Adjudicator who deals with this Appeal is legally qualified and each case is dealt with according to their understanding of the law as it applies and the legal principles involved. A decision by an Adjudicator is not legally binding on an Appellant who is entitled to seek their own legal advice if they so wish.
The signage in the roadway where the Appellant parked is prominent, clear and unequivocal; controlled land - no parking.
The Appellant's vehicle is recorded as entering the site at 11.16, the vehicle turning around and parking at 11.17, the driver leaving the vehicle, later returning at 13.53 and driving off.
Having considered all the issues raised and the evidence submitted, I am satisfied that the Appellant should have seen the prominent signage, should have realised that parking here was not allowed, and the operator has established that the Parking Charge was properly issued in accordance with the law.
This appeal therefore has to be dismissed. "

Thanks btw, I'll follow the advice on here going to forward

Click on the link for the requested details


https://1drv.ms/b/c/9dc1481d76d9c904/EfGPK9uinfhAnQJ0Y73-QJ4BzM4UCHVL2awOdvR610ohDg

thanks I'll give that a try

I've also just noticed the following wording by the operator on the adjudicator portal

The operator made their Prima Facie Case on 30/09/2025 13:09:36.

The operator reported that...
ANPR/CCTV was used.
The Notice to Keeper was sent on 18/09/2025.
A response was received from the Notice to Keeper.
The ticket was issued on 14/09/2025.
The Notice to Keeper (ANPR) was sent in accordance with PoFA.
The charge is based in Contract.

The operator made the following comments...
There are clear signs on this route that this area is a no parking area which can be seen in the photographic evidence circled in red. This is at the landowners request as the area is an access route.

As you can see the vehicle remained parked on this route. It is the drivers sole responsibility to ensure they are adhering to these terms and conditions.

This parking charge has been issued in line with PoFa 2012 and so UKPS will continue to hold the registered keeper liable.

As a result this parking charge was issued correctly.

Thanks for the very helpful reply, my vehicle was parked just around the corner of the site plan (bottom left) just past the building with the flat roof.

I can see from the photographs on the day that two signs are on the right hand side from the camera angle across the street where the vehicle was parked, these weren't noticed on the day. It can't be seen from the photographs which sign from those provided it was.

The driver thought he was parked on a public road as other vehicles were parked in the vicinity, there were no road markings and he didn't spot the signs hence why he parked.   

There is proof of parking in respect of photographs of the driver parking at 11:17 and returning at 13:53 so I don't think I should include point 7, but would appreciate your opinion before I reply.