Free Traffic Legal Advice

https://ibb.co/TxFPTgNZ
https://ibb.co/gLZTbyLg

Hi

I hope images of the penalty notice are included above.

We have received a penalty notice from APCOA Parking in my wife's name, as she is the registered keeper.  The notice refers to 'use of private car park without a valid payment/permit', and relates to a stay in Bracknell station car park.  It states that she was in breach of the Railway Byelaws.  It states that my wife is legally liable as the owner even if she was not the driver.  The evidence provided is a picture of the car, and a close-up of the registration number, leaving the car park.

My wife appealed with the following information:
•   my husband (me) was driving;
•   we bought a parking ticket for cash;
•   we thought the ticket was a bit odd, as the expiry time was 23.59 on the following day;
•   a photo of our number plate is not evidence that we did not buy a ticket;
•   we wonder if the machine incorrectly issued us with a ticket for the following day;
•   please review CCTV and look at the records from the ticket machine as evidence for what we are saying.

My wife then received a letter from APCOA asking for proof that a valid payment was made.  We responded as follows:
•   My wife stated that it was me who was driving the car, and that she wished to discharge her liability by naming me as the driver.  She asked that APCOA cancel the penalty and issue a new one to me.
•   I then said: the parking ticket was paid for in cash, and as the ticket has since been discarded, there is no further evidence to provide; the ticket did look a bit odd, as the expiry time was 23.59 on the next day; was there a fault with the machine and it issued a ticket for the next day and this is why your system is showing that we did not have a valid parking ticket for our stay?
•   I continued: as this is a penalty in respect of parking on private land, it is being raised under contract law (now not sure if this is right?), and the burden of proof lies entirely with you to prove a breach occurred. A photo of the car leaving the car park is obviously not proof we did not buy a ticket.  The ticket machine should show that we purchased a ticket using our registration number.
•   If you want to pursue this further, then you must prove I have breached your terms and conditions by providing both of the following: first, a clear time-stamped image of the vehicle showing that there was no parking ticket in the window; and second, logs from the ticket machine showing all tickets, with registration numbers, issued in a half hour slot during which we arrived. 
•   Finally, I said that the penalty notice seems to have been incorrectly issued.  My wife is not legally liable, as she was not the driver.  Your notice should have said that you did not know who the driver was, and invite the keeper to pay or pass on details of who was driving.  There was nothing in the notice about this.

Frustratingly, APCOA are still responding to my wife, with: appeal unsuccessful.  At the time the ANPR camera observed your vehicle they noted it was parked without a valid payment (they haven't provided evidence of this, just a shot of our car leaving the car park from a distance and a close-up of the registration number).  As the owner of the vehicle, you are liable for the charge as it is a Penalty Notice issued under railway byelaws.  The railway byelaws state that the owner of a motor vehicle left in breach of Byelaw 14(1) to 14(3) may be liable to pay a penalty.  If the Penalty Notice remains unpaid, APCOA Parking is entitled to pursue you as the keeper through the Magistrates Court by way of a private criminal prosecution. 

Apologies for the length of the above, but I want to give as full a picture as possible.  I understand I may have weakened our position by naming myself as the driver, but, if I leave this in my wife's name, she will be intimidated by these letters and will just pay, whereas I am an awkward !!!!!! who will argue!

I know the next step is an appeal to POPLA.  Will they actually be fair, as I believe they are funded by the parking companies?

I should be grateful for comments on the following:

Given that my wife has named me as the driver, are APCOA not obliged to discharge her from liability and re-issue a ticket to me?  So far, they have just ignored this point and continue to pursue her.

Have I got good grounds for an appeal?  I know that I cannot provide any evidence, as we paid in cash and have since discarded the ticket, but how is a photo of our car in the dark leaving the car park, and a close-up of the registration number, evidence that we did not pay?  Is the onus on APCOA to prove I did not pay, rather than on me to prove that I did?  I understand that APCOA will need to provide an evidence pack to POPLA, surely the picture they have sent of our car leaving the car park is not sufficient?

I am a little confused as to whether this issue is civil / contractual or criminal.

Any help or guidance much appreciated, as would be any links to the outcomes of similar cases.  And indeed links to any technical material that I should be reading.

Many thanks
Peter

Interesting that the Penalty Notice states that APCOA may pursue you through the Magistrates Court - I think that is a blatant lie.

Interesting that the Penalty Notice states that APCOA may pursue you through the Magistrates Court - I think that is a blatant lie.

I've been pondering this, but I don't think it is a lie (edit: at least so far as the byelaw breach itself is concerned).

Breach of a railway byelaw is an offence under byelaw 24.

Section 6(1) of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 preserves the right of any person to bring a private prosecution.

That right applies unless it is explicitly disallowed, and I can't find anything saying breaches of byelaws are restricted to (for example) TOCs. So I think technically they could?

Edit: rereading the PN, it says that they would be entitled to pursue "you through the Magistrates court... for payment of the penalty notice". The only arguable way that this could be true is by concluding that failing to comply with 14(4) is itself a breach of a byelaw:

The owner of any motor vehicle, bicycle or other conveyance used, left or placed in breach of Byelaw 14(1) to 14(3) may be
liable to pay a penalty as displayed in that area.

Thanks for advice so far.

Dates as follows:
Contravention 30/11/25
Penalty notice issued 10/12/2025
Appealed 14/12/2025
Evidence / information request from APCOA 19/12/2025
More detailed appeal 1/1/26
Rejection of appeal 6/1/26, this contains the POPLA code

Moving away from legal specificities and onto your practical options, there are two main options:

• The keeper could appeal to POPLA as close to the deadline as possible, including as many valid appeal points as they can come up with (throw the kitchen sink at it - the driver paid for parking, put them to strict proof there was adequate signage at the site, put them to strict proof that they have been contracted by the relevant train operating company to issue penalty notices etc. etc.). The purpose here is to drag the matter out as close as possible to the 6 month period after the parking event, after which point it is too late for them to prosecute even if they wanted to. Your POPLA appeal won't be successful, but the result is not binding on you.
• Ignore it and move on with your life. APCOA or a debt collector acting on their behalf will begin sending various letters warning of potential consequences. So far, we have never seen a single APCOA case (whether alleged byelaws penalties or civil parking charge notices) go to court. I can't see that changing.

With option #1 you have the satisfaction of knowing APCOA have to pay a fee to have the case heard at POPLA, and, whilst waiting for a POPLA decision, APCOA must put the matter on hold. Option #2 involves significantly less effort, and will very likely ultimately have the same ending, no further action being taken.

I would start the appeal by questioning whether POPLA are suitable to deal with a Penalty Charge Notice - POPLA normally deal with Parking Charge Notices issued on private land which is entirely different.

This is definitely more tricky than normal PCNs.

That is an interesting thread which you previously posted from MSE - yes, the link works fine.


One thing I noticed from the original Penalty Notice is that it was very generalised in its allegation - namely that 'there was a breach of Byelaw 14' - There is no Byelaw 14 - section 14 of railway byelaws is made up of many byelaws and they fail to state the specific byelaw they are using to pursue the keeper - this makes it difficult for the keeper to plead their case.

Thank you to all for your input, much appreciated.  Much food for thought!