Author Topic: CP Plus - no permit Hicks Lodge (Read 233 times)

Hinckleycb · « **on:** January 24, 2025, 03:50:13 pm »

Afternoon all, new to the forum following pepipoo's demise and was after some advice on this one please.

https://imgur.com/a/HRo7slW

Link above has pictures of the charge along with the entrance to the car park, where signs are located within the car park relevant to where the driver parked and the sign to the machine that at the time was being repaired.
All pictures are from going back to take after receiving said letter.

So driver entered car park, turning left into the site, there is no signage visible when turning left in stating charges etc. Driver parked up and was offered from a member of the public a ticket with no registration on the ticket, as it was an all day ticket the driver accepted not realising the car park had anpr, proceeded to walk the park then leave. Did not keep the parking ticket after.
Letter was received approximately a week go.
Let me know if there is any further info you may need. Many thanks

b789 · « **Reply #1 on:** January 24, 2025, 06:10:00 pm »

Hicks Lodge, the National Forest Cycle Centre, is land under statutory control. Land under statutory control typically falls under the jurisdiction of byelaws or legislation, such as local government acts, railway byelaws, or specific statutory instruments.

Hicks Lodge is managed by Forestry England, which operates as part of the Forestry Commission, a statutory body. The Forestry Commission operates under the Forestry Act 1967 and has established byelaws to regulate activities on the lands it manages. These byelaws, known as the Forestry Commission Byelaws 1982, apply to all lands under the Commission's management or control where the public has, or may be permitted to have, access.

One of the key provisions of the Forestry Commission Byelaws 1982:

As such, it is not relevant land for the purposes of PoFA which means that the Keeper cannot be liable. Group Nexus have no idea of the driver identity and there is no legal obligation on the Keeper to identify the driver to an unregulated private parking company.

As GroupNexus has issued a Notice to Keeper (NtK) claiming that they have the right under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) to hold the Keeper liable for an alleged parking contravention on land that is not 'relevant land' under PoFA, such as the Hicks Lodge car park, they are acting unlawfully by misrepresenting their legal position.

Claiming a right under PoFA to hold the Keeper liable on non-relevant land constitutes a misrepresentation of the law, which breaches the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPUTRs) which prohibits businesses from making false or misleading claims that influence consumers' decisions. It is also a breach of The Fraud Act 2006 (Section 2). If the misrepresentation is deliberate and intended to gain a financial advantage (e.g., payment of a charge), this constitutes fraud.

GroupNexus is a member of the British Parking Association (BPA) and the BPA/IPC Private Parking Single Code of Practice (PPSCoP) requires members to adhere to the law. Misstating the applicability of PoFA breaches the PPSCoP and is grounds for a complaint to the BPA.

I advise that you send a formal complaint to GroupNexus, which met also be considered as an appeal under section 11.2 of the PPSCoP. Send it as a PDF attachment in an email to info@groupnexus.co.uk. Let's see how they respond:

Quote

GroupNexus
Jack Straws Castle
12 North End Way
London, NW3 7ES

By email: info@groupnexus.co.uk

[Date]

Subject: Formal Complaint and Appeal Regarding Notice to Keeper [Reference Number]

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing as the Registered Keeper regarding the Notice to Keeper (NtK) issued by GroupNexus, reference [insert reference number], for an alleged parking contravention at Hicks Lodge, the National Forest Cycle Centre.

This correspondence is a formal complaint and must also be considered an appeal under Section 11.2 of the Private Parking Single Code of Practice (PPSCoP).

Grounds of Appeal and Complaint

1. Misrepresentation of Keeper Liability under PoFA

Your NtK claims that the registered Keeper is liable for this parking charge under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA). However, Hicks Lodge is managed by Forestry England and is subject to the Forestry Commission Byelaws 1982. Land subject to statutory control is not "relevant land" as defined in Schedule 4, Paragraph 3(1)(c) of PoFA, and therefore PoFA cannot be used to transfer liability to the Keeper.

2. Right to Issue PCNs

While GroupNexus may have a valid contract with the landowner allowing the issuance of Parking Charge Notices (PCNs) for alleged contractual breaches, your NtK misrepresents your ability to rely on PoFA to hold the Keeper liable. As the land is not relevant land under PoFA, you can only pursue the driver of the vehicle, whose identity has not been disclosed.

3.Compliance with the PPSCoP

Your NtK fails to meet the requirements of the PPSCoP, including:

• Transparency: Misstating the applicability of PoFA breaches transparency standards.

• Accuracy: Failing to acknowledge the land's statutory control.

Required Actions

I formally request that you:

1. Cancel the Parking Charge Notice immediately, as it has no legal standing against me as the registered Keeper.

2. Provide written confirmation that no further action will be taken against me.

3. Ensure all future NtKs issued for land not classified as relevant under PoFA are amended to avoid misrepresentation.

Failure to resolve this complaint satisfactorily will result in escalation to:

• The British Parking Association (BPA) for breaches of the PPSCoP.

• Trading Standards for misrepresentation of legal rights.

• The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO), if there is evidence of improper handling of personal data.

I expect a full response to this complaint and appeal within the timeframe set out in the PPSCoP.

Yours faithfully,

[Your Full Name]
Registered Keeper of Vehicle [Registration Number]

Hinckleycb · « **Reply #2 on:** February 01, 2025, 11:49:26 am »

Many thanks for your reply, it's great to see so many helpful people on here. I've had the following response, let me know your thoughts.

Dear Sir/Madam,

Thank you for your correspondence relating to your Parking Charge.

The Charge was issued and the signage is displayed in compliance with The Private Parking Sector Single Code of Practice and all relevant laws and regulations.

Clear signs at the entrance of this site and throughout inform drivers of the requirement to pay for parking, and it is not possible to access any part of the premises without passing multiple signs. Your representations are not considered a mitigating circumstance for appeal.

We confirm the Charge was issued under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. As no driver details have been provided, we are holding the registered keeper of the vehicle liable.

In light of this, on this occasion, your representations have been carefully considered and rejected.

We can confirm that we will hold the Charge at the current rate of £50 for a further 14 days from the date of this correspondence. If no payment is received within this period, and no further appeal to POPLA is made, the Charge will escalate and further costs may be added.

Please find below the payment options:

Online: www.groupnexus.co.uk/pcn

By Telephone: Credit/Debit cards via our automated payment line: 0844 371 8784

By Post: Cheques or Postal Orders to: PO Box 1750, Northampton, NN1 9PN

----------

You have now reached the end of our internal appeals procedure. This correspondence represents our final stance on the matter and we will therefore not enter into any further correspondence.

CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED FOLLOWING THE REJECTION OF AN APPEAL WILL NOT CHANGE THE OUTCOME OR EXTEND THE DATE IN WHICH PAYMENT SHOULD BE MADE.

Although we have now rejected your appeal, you may still have recourse to appeal to Parking On Private Land Appeals (POPLA), an independent appeals service. An appeal to POPLA must be made within 28 days of the date of this correspondence. POPLA will only consider cases on the grounds that the Parking Charge exceeded the appropriate amount, that the vehicle was not improperly parked or had been stolen, or that you were otherwise not liable for the Parking Charge. To appeal to POPLA, please go to their website http://www.popla.co.uk and follow the instructions. If you would rather deal with this matter by post, please contact our Appeals Office and we will send you the necessary paperwork.

Your POPLA reference number is:

POPLA will not consider any cases where payment has been made. You must pay the charge or appeal to POPLA, you cannot do both.

By law we are also required to inform you that Ombudsman Services (www.ombudsman-services.org/) provides an alternative dispute resolution service that would be competent to deal with your appeal. However, we have not chosen to participate in their alternative dispute resolution service. As such should you wish to appeal then you must do so to POPLA, as explained above.

Yours faithfully,

CP Plus Ltd

b789 · « **Reply #3 on:** February 01, 2025, 05:57:35 pm »

SO, they didn't answer the point about the land being under statutory control and therefore not relevant land for the purposes of PoFA. There are now two things to do...

One is to submit a POPLA appeal and the other is to raise a formal complaint about CP Plus with the BPA as they have not responded to all your points in the formal complaint.

Normally I would suggest a lengthy POPLA appeal covering as many points as possible. However, there was a very recent POPLA decision that was successful and the appeal was very succinct and to the point. Using that successful POPLA appeal I thought it would be good to adapt it to this situation, which is very similar to the one it was originally made.

You are appealing ONLY as the Keeper:

Quote

I am the registered keeper of the vehicle [XXXXXX] and have received the Notice to Keeper (NTK) from CP Plus. I note that the operator has not identified the driver. I understand that I have no legal obligation to disclose the identity of the driver.

My primary ground for this appeal is that the 28-day warning within your NTK misleadingly implies that I, as the keeper, can be held liable for this charge under the provisions of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA). This is legally incorrect because the location in question—Hicks Lodge, National Forest Cycle Centre—is land owned and managed by Forestry England, which operates as part of the Forestry Commission, a statutory body.

The Forestry Commission operates under the Forestry Act 1967 and has established byelaws that regulate activities on the lands it manages. These byelaws, known as the Forestry Commission Byelaws 1982, apply to all lands under the Commission’s management or control where the public has, or may be permitted to have, access. As such, Hicks Lodge is not 'relevant land' as defined in Schedule 4 of PoFA 2012, meaning that the keeper cannot be held liable for any parking charge if the driver is not identified.

Your NTK appears to suggest otherwise, misleadingly omitting any acknowledgment that PoFA does not apply in this case. This constitutes a misrepresentation of legal authority, making the demand for payment against the keeper wholly invalid.

Given that you have not identified the driver, that I am not willing nor obliged to provide such information, and that you have no legal basis to hold me liable as keeper due to the statutory control of this land, I respectfully request that this appeal be upheld and that the PCN be withdrawn.

DWMB2 · « **Reply #4 on:** February 01, 2025, 06:08:29 pm »

I would change the "you"/"your" to CP Plus or "the operator" - as the audience for the POPLA appeal is the assessor, not the parking company.

I'd also be tempted to quote the specific section of the byelways that state they apply to all land managed by the Commission.

I know it's rather stating the obvious, but that's never a bad thing with POPLA

Hinckleycb · « **Reply #5 on:** February 11, 2025, 04:41:27 pm »

Thanks for the replies, I see popla ask for evidence such as photos and a time line of everything, am I ignoring the latter on the basis that it's not relevant on the basis it's on forestry land then I just provide the above from b789 and add in if I feel necessary the bylaw info? Assume with the BPA just basically attach their original letter and state areas from your reply b789 as to why I'm making the complaint?

b789 · « **Reply #6 on:** February 11, 2025, 05:12:07 pm »

If you need to read the Forestry Commission Byelaws:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1982/648/pdfs/uksi_19820648_en.pdf

• Statutory Control – The byelaws confirm that vehicle use, including parking, is subject to rules set by the Forestry Commission, a statutory body operating under the Forestry Act 1967. This suggests that the land is under statutory control.
• Not 'Relevant Land' under PoFA – Since PoFA 2012 only applies to land that is not under statutory control, the presence of enforceable byelaws indicates that this location does not meet the definition of relevant land under Schedule 4 of PoFA.
• No Explicit Keeper Liability Mechanism – The byelaws do not specify any mechanism allowing a private parking operator to impose liability on the registered keeper. This further supports the argument that CP Plus has no legal authority to pursue the keeper under PoFA.

DWMB2 · « **Reply #7 on:** February 11, 2025, 06:23:55 pm »

Create a PDF using Word or some other word processor, using the text suggested by b789 (and the suggested amendments by me, referring to the operator instead of 'you' etc.).

You then upload that to the POPLA online portal once you've logged in etc. You're choosing "Other" as your reason for appeal.

Hinckleycb · « **Reply #8 on:** February 16, 2025, 10:49:14 pm »

Thanks both, I'll update you with the responses I get

Hinckleycb · « **Reply #9 on:** February 21, 2025, 10:37:10 pm »

So I have had no reply as of yet from popla which is to be expected (I submitted on the 18th Feb) but I've had a letter since from nexus, a "parking charge reminder and legal action pending" dated 17th Feb. Can I keep this as part of my complaint as their original response to my "appeal" stated I had 14 days to pay at the lower rate and 28 days to submit to popla, surely in that timeframe they shouldn't be then sending more letters threatening legal action or is there nothing to say they can't do so? Just screams scare tactics to make you not appeal to popla to me.
It makes a very big point of mentioning a case between parking eye vs beavis established a parking charge is enforceable on private land which we have already told them this land is not which I find quite ironic.

b789 · « **Reply #10 on:** February 22, 2025, 04:37:32 am »

You didn't show us the initial appeal rejection reason from CP Plus and you didn't show us what you submitted to POPLA.

For now, submit the following as a formal complaint to GroupNexus as a PDF attachment to an email to: info@groupnexus.co.uk and also CC in yourself.

Quote

Complaints Team
GroupNexus
Jack Straws Castle
North End Way
London
NW3 7ES

Delivered by email to: info@groupnexus.co.uk

Subject: Formal Complaint – Procedural Breach and Unfair Enforcement During POPLA Appeal

PCN ref: [PCN number]

Date

Dear Complaints Team,

I am writing to formally lodge a complaint regarding your enforcement actions in relation to Parking Charge Notice (PCN) [PCN Reference Number], issued for an alleged parking contravention at Hicks Lodge, National Forest Cycle Centre.

Grounds for Complaint

Your actions in continuing enforcement processes while my appeal is pending with POPLA constitute a serious procedural breach of industry standards, including the Private Parking Single Code of Practice (PPSCoP). Specifically:

1. Issuing Reminder Letters and Debt Recovery Action During a Pending POPLA Appeal

• I submitted a formal appeal to POPLA on [Date of POPLA Appeal Submission], which is currently awaiting adjudication.

• Despite this, I received a "Parking Charge Reminder and Legal Action Pending" letter, dated 17th February 2025, which improperly threatens further enforcement action before the independent appeals process has concluded.

• This is a clear violation of consumer protection expectations and suggests an attempt to pressure me into paying rather than allowing the appeal to be fairly adjudicated.

2. Breach of the Private Parking Single Code of Practice (PPSCoP)

• The PPSCoP explicitly states that enforcement action must be paused while an appeal is under review by an accredited ADR provider (such as POPLA).

• Your decision to continue enforcement action before the appeal is decided contradicts fair appeals procedures and is unacceptable.

3. Violation of the DVLA’s Keeper at Date of Event (KADOE) Contract

• The KADOE contract governs your access to vehicle keeper data and requires strict compliance with all relevant industry codes of practice.

• Since the PPSCoP is referenced within BPA governance, your breach of the PPSCoP also constitutes a KADOE contract violation.

• This matter will be escalated to the DVLA for investigation, as the consequences of such a breach could result in sanctions or suspension of your ability to access registered keeper data.

Required Actions

To resolve this matter fairly and in accordance with regulatory expectations, I require that GroupNexus:

1. Immediately cease all enforcement action, including debt recovery, while the POPLA appeal remains pending.

2. Confirm in writing that you have withdrawn all active enforcement measures until a final POPLA decision is reached.

3. Provide an explanation as to why these procedural breaches have occurred and what corrective measures you will take to prevent future non-compliance.

Next Steps

If you fail to confirm compliance with these actions within 14 days of the date of this letter, I will escalate this complaint to the DVLA, the British Parking Association (BPA), and Trading Standards, citing unfair consumer practices and non-compliance with the industry codes of practice governing private parking enforcement.

Please treat this matter with urgency and confirm receipt of this complaint at your earliest convenience. I expect a full response no later than [Response Deadline – 14 Days from Letter Date].

Yours faithfully,

[Your Name]
Your Contact Information]

Hinckleycb · « **Reply #11 on:** March 11, 2025, 08:54:27 pm »

Hi, I put up their rejection and yourselves replied telling me what to say to their rejection, I amended with what dwmb2 said about amending from you etc to the operator for the popla appeal, apologies if I've not done what I should. I've had cp plus respond with their "evidence". Would it be best to upload this?

Hinckleycb · « **Reply #12 on:** March 11, 2025, 09:48:13 pm »

B789 with regards you saying to make a complaint the letter was sent 17th February whilst I made the appeal to popla on the 18th. Am I best not doing that right now or should they have waited the full amount of time I could appeal to popla before sending a reminder?

b789 · « **Reply #13 on:** March 11, 2025, 11:26:14 pm »

Upload the operators evidence pack so that we can see it. Use DropBox or GoogleDrive.

What reminder are you talking about? If GroupNexus (CP Plus) have not responded to the formal complaint, then you escalate it to the BPA and the DVLA.

Hinckleycb · « **Reply #14 on:** March 13, 2025, 10:48:24 pm »

Link below to their evidence

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/k4ximu2vy9730wk4wwvw8/Popla.pdf?rlkey=on0wqmgvq2wgsuucet6xwdt12&st=c7bjio5b&dl=0

CP plus sent me a reminder to respond with payment or they will take further action on the 17th after their initial rejection response. I started my case with popla on the 18th so I wanted to check that I should still be making a complaint to the various people you've said as at the point of sending me the letter I hadn't started my appeal process. Or should they not be sending any reminders until the time has passed for me to start my appeal with popla? Hope I've not confused things too much.

Free Traffic Legal Advice

Author Topic: CP Plus - no permit Hicks Lodge (Read 233 times)

Hinckleycb

CP Plus - no permit Hicks Lodge

b789

Re: CP Plus - no permit Hicks Lodge

Hinckleycb

Re: CP Plus - no permit Hicks Lodge

b789

Re: CP Plus - no permit Hicks Lodge

DWMB2

Re: CP Plus - no permit Hicks Lodge

Hinckleycb

Re: CP Plus - no permit Hicks Lodge

b789

Re: CP Plus - no permit Hicks Lodge

DWMB2

Re: CP Plus - no permit Hicks Lodge

Hinckleycb

Re: CP Plus - no permit Hicks Lodge

Hinckleycb

Re: CP Plus - no permit Hicks Lodge

b789

Re: CP Plus - no permit Hicks Lodge

Hinckleycb

Re: CP Plus - no permit Hicks Lodge

Hinckleycb

Re: CP Plus - no permit Hicks Lodge

b789

Re: CP Plus - no permit Hicks Lodge

Hinckleycb

Re: CP Plus - no permit Hicks Lodge