1
Private parking tickets / Re: Horizon Parking Premier Inn Boston
« on: February 10, 2026, 08:49:31 am »
Oh what a suprise.....appeal rejected by POPLA. What a load of drivel! . .
Decision
Unsuccessful
Assessor Name
Kevin Woodall
Assessor summary of operator case
The operator has issued the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) due failure to pay or register for duration of stay.
Assessor summary of your case
The appellant has provided a detailed account surrounding the parking event in question. For the purpose of my report, I have summarised the grounds raised into the points below. • They advise the operator has stated that as they have not provided the name and address of the driver, they have the right under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) to charge them as the keeper, however, this only applies to England and does not create keeper liability under a Scottish keeper and in Scotland, it is only with the driver. • They say they are acting as the keeper and were not the driver and are under no legal obligation to identify the driver and POPLA cannot rely on PoFA to hold a Scottish keeper liable where Parliament has not conferred such power. After reviewing the operator’s evidence, the appellant has reiterated their grounds of appeal and expanded on their comments regarding PoFA. All of the above has been considered in making my determination.
Assessor supporting rational for decision
When assessing an appeal POPLA considers if the operator has issued the parking charge notice correctly and if the driver has complied with the terms and conditions for the use of the car park. The operator has provided photographic evidence of the signage in place in the car park, which detail the terms and conditions of parking. The signs state “…Premier Inn gusts FREE via validation…Restaurant customers Up to 3 hours FREE via validation…Just looking to park? Please pay on arrival using any of the options below…” The motorist is also advised that failure to comply with the terms and conditions will result in a PCN being issued for £100. The operator has provided a registration log to demonstrate that the vehicle in question was not authorised to park. • They advise the operator has stated that as they have not provided the name and address of the driver, they have the right under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) to charge them as the keeper, however, this only applies to England and does not create keeper liability under a Scottish keeper and in Scotland, it is only with the driver. While PoFA is not applicable for parking events in Scotland, I must advise that this parking event taken place in England. PoFA applies to sites within England itself rather than where the keeper lives. The Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA) 2012 is a law that allows parking operators to transfer the liability to the registered keeper in the event that the driver or hirer is not identified. Parking operators have to follow certain rules including warning the registered keeper that they will be liable if the parking operator is not provided with the name and address of the driver. In this case, the PCN in question has the necessary information and the parking operator has therefore successfully transferred the liability onto the registered keeper. • They say they are acting as the keeper and were not the driver and are under no legal obligation to identify the driver and POPLA cannot rely on PoFA to hold a Scottish keeper liable where Parliament has not conferred such power. When they provided further comments in response to the operator’s case file, they have stated the following: “…The Department for Transport’s own guidance expressly describes Schedule 4 as a regime for recovering unpaid private parking charges “on private land in England and Wales” and the sector’s own material openly recognises that Schedule 4 does not apply in Scotland and does not create keeper liability there…” As this specifically states ‘on private land in England and Wales’, and the parking even was in England, this further proves that PoFA does apply in this instance. POPLA’s role is to assess if the operator has issued the charge in accordance with the conditions of the contract. As the terms and conditions of the car park have not been met, as the vehicle was not authorised to park, I conclude that the operator has issued the parking charge correctly, and the appeal is refused.
Decision
Unsuccessful
Assessor Name
Kevin Woodall
Assessor summary of operator case
The operator has issued the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) due failure to pay or register for duration of stay.
Assessor summary of your case
The appellant has provided a detailed account surrounding the parking event in question. For the purpose of my report, I have summarised the grounds raised into the points below. • They advise the operator has stated that as they have not provided the name and address of the driver, they have the right under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) to charge them as the keeper, however, this only applies to England and does not create keeper liability under a Scottish keeper and in Scotland, it is only with the driver. • They say they are acting as the keeper and were not the driver and are under no legal obligation to identify the driver and POPLA cannot rely on PoFA to hold a Scottish keeper liable where Parliament has not conferred such power. After reviewing the operator’s evidence, the appellant has reiterated their grounds of appeal and expanded on their comments regarding PoFA. All of the above has been considered in making my determination.
Assessor supporting rational for decision
When assessing an appeal POPLA considers if the operator has issued the parking charge notice correctly and if the driver has complied with the terms and conditions for the use of the car park. The operator has provided photographic evidence of the signage in place in the car park, which detail the terms and conditions of parking. The signs state “…Premier Inn gusts FREE via validation…Restaurant customers Up to 3 hours FREE via validation…Just looking to park? Please pay on arrival using any of the options below…” The motorist is also advised that failure to comply with the terms and conditions will result in a PCN being issued for £100. The operator has provided a registration log to demonstrate that the vehicle in question was not authorised to park. • They advise the operator has stated that as they have not provided the name and address of the driver, they have the right under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) to charge them as the keeper, however, this only applies to England and does not create keeper liability under a Scottish keeper and in Scotland, it is only with the driver. While PoFA is not applicable for parking events in Scotland, I must advise that this parking event taken place in England. PoFA applies to sites within England itself rather than where the keeper lives. The Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA) 2012 is a law that allows parking operators to transfer the liability to the registered keeper in the event that the driver or hirer is not identified. Parking operators have to follow certain rules including warning the registered keeper that they will be liable if the parking operator is not provided with the name and address of the driver. In this case, the PCN in question has the necessary information and the parking operator has therefore successfully transferred the liability onto the registered keeper. • They say they are acting as the keeper and were not the driver and are under no legal obligation to identify the driver and POPLA cannot rely on PoFA to hold a Scottish keeper liable where Parliament has not conferred such power. When they provided further comments in response to the operator’s case file, they have stated the following: “…The Department for Transport’s own guidance expressly describes Schedule 4 as a regime for recovering unpaid private parking charges “on private land in England and Wales” and the sector’s own material openly recognises that Schedule 4 does not apply in Scotland and does not create keeper liability there…” As this specifically states ‘on private land in England and Wales’, and the parking even was in England, this further proves that PoFA does apply in this instance. POPLA’s role is to assess if the operator has issued the charge in accordance with the conditions of the contract. As the terms and conditions of the car park have not been met, as the vehicle was not authorised to park, I conclude that the operator has issued the parking charge correctly, and the appeal is refused.