POPLA have given me 7 days to respond to the evidence provided by UKPC to my appeal.
UKPC's evidence letter is below. Any advice about how I should respond?
*****
On 18/04/2026, a parking event occurred relating to vehicle registration XXXX XXX. The event was recorded by our ANPR cameras at Instavolt - M The Lanes because the vehicle was a Non EV vehicle parking in an EV Bay.
The parking charge rate was £100.00, reduced to £60.00 if payment was received within fourteen days.
Following the parking event on 18/04/2026, UKPC had reasonable cause to obtain the details of the registered keeper from the DVLA for the purposes of issuing a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) by post- a copy of this PCN is included in this pack. The PCN was issued on 22/04/2026
An appeal was received from the vehicle keeper MR XXXXX XXXXXX on the 04/05/2026, which the appeals department investigated and decided to reject.
Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 discusses the recovery of unpaid parking charges. It allows parking operators to hold the registered keeper liable to pay unpaid parking charges if the operator has not been provided the name and a serviceable address of the driver.
Our initial notice clearly states "UK Parking Control Ltd do not know the name and address of the driver. We therefore invite you, the registered keeper, to pay this Parking Charge or provide us with the name and current address of the driver so that we may write to them and request payment" and as no driver details have been provided to us we are continuing under keeper liability.
The site is managed by ANPR systems which simply take images of vehicle registration numbers entering and exiting a bay; to calculate the total amount of time the terms and conditions were breached for. They have been specially calibrated to only take photos of contravening vehicles within the bays they are directed at.
In terms of the technology of the cameras themselves, the British Parking Association audits the camera systems in use by parking operators in order to ensure that they are in good working order and that the data collected is accurate. Independent research has found that the technology is generally accurate. Unless we are presented with sufficient evidence to prove otherwise, we work on the basis that the technology was working at the time of the alleged improper parking
Parking a non-electric vehicle in a designated EV charging bay is a clear violation of parking terms and conditions, regardless of the reason given. EV bays are specifically reserved for vehicles that need to charge, supporting drivers who rely on access to charging infrastructure to continue their journeys. When a petrol or diesel vehicle occupies these spaces without authorization, it prevents electric vehicle users from accessing essential facilities, potentially causing significant inconvenience or disruption.
Parking in a restricted bay, such as one designated exclusively for electric vehicle use, constitutes a substantive breach of the clearly stated terms and conditions of use rather than a minor procedural oversight. Accordingly, the operator is entitled to issue a Parking Charge Notice without the need to afford a five-minute consideration period.
It can be seen from the images that the EV bays are clearly marked via signage, with visually obvious EV chargers between. As such UKPC contend that there is no reason to pull into an EV bay for even 1 minute, if the vehicle is not electric.
For clarity, both the consideration period (before a contract is formed) and the grace period (after parking has ended) are distinct and not intended to extend the allowable parking duration. As per SCoP these periods must not be combined or treated as additional parking time. Neither of these are a free period of parking.
The signage in place clearly sets out the terms and conditions of parking, forming the basis of the contractual agreement. Upon entering the car park, it is the responsibility of the motorist to review these terms and ensure compliance before deciding to park. If a motorist is unable to comply, does not understand, or disagrees with the terms, they should refrain from parking and thereby not enter into the contract. Otherwise, by choosing to park, they accept the terms and may be held liable for a Parking Charge Notice, as stated on the signage.
The driver of the vehicle does not need to have read the terms and conditions of the contract to accept it. There is only the requirement that the driver is afforded the opportunity to read and understand the terms and conditions of the contract before accepting it. It is the driver’s responsibility to seek out the terms and conditions, and ensure they understand them, before agreeing to the contract and parking.
Entrance signage on site directs motorists to contravention signage on site, thus affording motorists the ability to locate and acknowledge those terms before agreeing to stay or leave the site.
Our signage conforms to the guidelines set out within the code, and we are audited regularly by the BPA for those standards; the signs must be provided to make it easy for motorists to find out what the terms and conditions are and that the signs contain the specific parking terms throughout the site, so that drivers are given the chance to read them at the time of parking or leaving their vehicle. Signs must be conspicuous and legible, and written in intelligible language, so that they are easy to see, read and understand. The BPA audits have confirmed that we follow this to their standard.
It is also important to remember that if a motorist chooses to park on privately owned land, they are entering into a parking contract. Parking contracts are legally binding agreements. Like any other contract, they must be adhered to strictly. The concept of acting in "good faith" does not override the clear obligations set out in the contract. Compliance with the terms is not optional, and there are no discretionary or “grey areas” once the contract has been accepted. Furthermore, the signage clearly tells motorists the penalty for a breach of the terms and conditions. UKPC are simply employed to manage the car park.
UKPC must maintain a consistent approach when issuing and upholding a charge. In this instance, this vehicle had been parked on site in direct breach of the terms and conditions of parking on site as stated on signage.
UK Parking Control signage complies fully with section 18 of the British Parking Association Code of Practice and we reject the suggestion that it is vague or misleading. Entrance signage advises motorists that terms of parking apply, and that notices within the car park should be checked to identify the full terms and conditions. These notices are placed throughout the car park. It is ultimately the responsibility of the motorist to ensure they identify the terms of parking, and then decide whether to park their vehicle, or leave the site if they are unable to meet those terms.
The parking charges issued by UK Parking Control Limited are based on a contractual agreement between UKPC and the driver, as detailed on the signage displayed in the car park. The signage states the terms and conditions of parking and explains that a parking charge will be payable if the terms are not met by the driver. We ensure that signage is ample, clear and visible, wholly in line with the British Parking Association Code of Practice. It is settled law that a driver is deemed to have accepted the terms and conditions of parking by the act of parking and leaving a vehicle.
Ultimately, it is fundamentally the responsibility of the motorist to identify the terms of parking when leaving their vehicle on private land. If they feel they are unable to adhere to the terms, they may leave the site before agreeing to those terms.
There are sufficient signs advising drivers that parking a Non EV vehicle in an EV Bay may result in a parking charge being issued. MR XXXXX XXXXXX's vehicle was parked in an EV bay despite not being an EV; consequently, the parking charge was issued correctly.
A letter was sent to MR XXXXX XXXXXX informing him of our decision on the 08/05/2026.
