Britannia NTK for Parking longer than the permitted time

Quote

In addition, should this Parking Charge reach court proceedings, we will put in a request to the judge that
the insurance certificate for the vehicle to reviewed as evidence, to determine who was able to drive the vehicle at the time of the contravention.

Comical that they're still using this line. The insurance certificate tells you almost nothing. My insurance would cover me to drive your car (with your permission).

Yes I thought that too.

Quote

In addition, should this Parking Charge reach court proceedings, we will put in a request to the judge that
the insurance certificate for the vehicle to reviewed as evidence, to determine who was able to drive the vehicle at the time of the contravention.

Comical that they're still using this line. The insurance certificate tells you almost nothing. My insurance would cover me to drive your car (with your permission).

Do you think my suggest response is suitable?

Yep - see what they do next.

The keeper needs to make a representation which makes clear that the representation IS the appeal and, therefore, they must uphold the appeal or reject it and provide a POPLA code.

No need to faff about chewing the technicalities over at this stage.

This will 99% win at POPLA.


I'd suggest the following;

Thank you for your last email.

I have noted the representations which you have made.

Please consider that this email is my formal appeal.

Your note relating to the keeper being liable (via assumption) under contract law is utter nonsense and I am submitting this as evidence to the CMA as your statement clearly demonstrates your intention to mislead a consumer - additionally, your statement could lead a consumer (the keeper) to conduct a financial transaction with you.

This unacceptable behaviour is clearly highlighted in the recent open letter (to the parking industry) from the CMA.

For the purposes of clarity;

I am the vehicle keeper and, in the circumstance, there is no legal or contractual requirement for me to reveal the driver.

As per VCS Ltd v Edward - No adverse conclusion can be drawn from a keeper saying nothing when the law does not require the keeper to say anything.

Your choices are;

1. Save time, money and further resources by cancelling this PCN

OR

2. Reject my appeal, waste more time and money by providing a POPLA code so I can submit a slam-dunk appeal.


I am sorry that I cannot help you further.


Best wishes,

xxxxxx xxxxxxxx

The keeper needs to make a representation which makes clear that the representation IS the appeal and, therefore, they must uphold the appeal or reject it and provide a POPLA code.

No need to faff about chewing the technicalities over at this stage.

This will 99% win at POPLA.


I'd suggest the following;

Thank you for your last email.

I have noted the representations which you have made.

Please consider that this email is my formal appeal.

Your note relating to the keeper being liable (via assumption) under contract law is utter nonsense and I am submitting this as evidence to the CMA as your statement clearly demonstrates your intention to mislead a consumer - additionally, your statement could lead a consumer (the keeper) to conduct a financial transaction with you.

This unacceptable behaviour is clearly highlighted in the recent open letter (to the parking industry) from the CMA.

For the purposes of clarity;

I am the vehicle keeper and, in the circumstance, there is no legal or contractual requirement for me to reveal the driver.

As per VCS Ltd v Edward - No adverse conclusion can be drawn from a keeper saying nothing when the law does not require the keeper to say anything.

Your choices are;

1. Save time, money and further resources by cancelling this PCN

OR

2. Reject my appeal, waste more time and money by providing a POPLA code so I can submit a slam-dunk appeal.


I am sorry that I cannot help you further.


Best wishes,

xxxxxx xxxxxxxx

Thanks for this, but before I read your response, I already went ahead and use the reply I posted in earlier. Should I also send this on top or just leave it now?

Their reply. Should I respond or leave it there:

"Re: Parking Charge Number A7499040, Vehicle: HY16VXS
Site: Wokingham - Waitrose
Issue date: 23/07/2026
Thank you for your appeal received on 28/08/2026 regarding the above Parking Charge.
We have considered your appeal and comments you have made; in conjunction with any evidence you
have provided and the photographs we have on record.
The Parking Charge was issued to your vehicle because you over stayed the maximum time permitted for
parking at this car park. The store operates as a 90 minutes maximum stay car park.
Britannia Parking is an active member of the British Parking Association (BPA) and we follow their
Approved Operators Scheme, Code of Practice at all times. We meet all signage requirements under the
BPA's Code of Practice regarding signage and notifying the driver of the terms and conditions.
British Parking Association Code of Practice - Consideration and Grace Periods
Where a parking location is one where a limited period of parking is permitted (Max stay), or where
drivers contract to park for a defined period and pay for that service in advance (Pay & Display), this
would be considered as a parking event and a Grace Period of at least 10 minutes must be added to the
end of a parking event before a Parking Charge can be issued.
Neither a consideration period or a grace period are periods of free parking and there is no requirement
for Britannia Parking to offer an additional allowance on top of a consideration or grace period.
We give motorist a 10 minute grace period at the end of parking event to leave the car park before a
Parking Charge is issued, which is within the BPA guidelines.

After 90 minutes of parking, your 10 minute grace will commence, if the driver has not left the car park by
the time the 10 minute grace period has been reached, a Parking Charge will be issued for breaching the
terms and conditions of the car park.
Therefore, we consider the Parking Charge to be valid and correctly issued.

Having considered the content of your letter and our internal review, as this is your first Parking Charge
appeal, we are prepared to cancel the notice; with the understanding that you will not continue to breach
the terms and conditions; as you are now aware of the maximum stay time permitted for this car park.

Yours sincerely,
Appeals Department
Britannia Parking"

I can't accept their statement on behalf of a driver not established? Are going to cancel this or are they waiting on me to say yes to something?

Don't make a mountain out of a molehill, just write to them briefly noting the content of their letter and that you have ensured that the driver is aware of the terms and conditions of the car park.

I'm not sure there's a need for a reply at all.

I'm not sure there's a need for a reply at all.

My thought as well.