Free Traffic Legal Advice

We currently have several appeals with POPLA based on ECP's non compliant NtKs.

We'll have to see what happens with those.

I (hopefully) came up with an appeal wording which makes it very difficult for the assessor to 'skip over' the issue of non compliant NtKs as they have done in the past.

https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/euro-car-parks-exceeded-3hr-time-peel-centre-bracknell/


That's one of them.

Scroll to post#14 to see the comments on operators evidence which sets out the failure points of ECP's NtKs.

Just a quick note to say thank you for all this very helpful feedback. I will collate and attempt to compose an appeal which I will post here to be pulled apart before submitting!

Many thanks
Al

Hello there, Below is a transcript of my intended Appeal. Please advice if there are any glaring ommissions, errors etc.

One other thing - the PCN was issued on 28/01, but I did not receive it until 07 or 08/02 (Can't be sure.) That only leaves three days until the '11 days' early payment option disappears which seems sneaky at best, illegal at worst. Luckily, I'm not paying it. Anyway - the appeal:


Dear Sir/Madam

I would like to appeal this PCN as the registered keeper of the vehicle. I also pre-paid for the parking as outlined below.

The driver entered Brunel House Car Park at 22:22 on 22/01/26 and proceeded to unpack the car. The car was moved into its space and up against a barrier at 22:30 as that was when the allotted time paid for with JustPark began.

The car was booked into the car park through the JustPark App from 22:30 on the 22nd to 19:30 on the 23rd for £14.29, booking ref 99882108

The next day the driver arrived back at the car at 19:25, five minutes before the allotted parking time was over and moved the car away from the barrier to repack it. The driver then drove out of the car park at 19:33.

Your PCN states the vehicle was parked ‘without a valid Pay by Phone transaction.' I dispute this as a transaction was paid for through JustPark, and the car was not parked within a bay except during the time paid for.

On reviewing the information regarding the PCN, the Just Park App stated the early arrival is ok as long as the vehicle was not actually parked before the Parking start time. Presumably this would also extend to the three minutes after 19:30 on the 23rd. Either way, a £100 fine for a three minute overstay within the confines of the car park is highly excessive.

Additionally, I also note the Notice to Keeper does not meet the full requirements of The Protection of Freedoms Act (2012).

In summary, as the registered keeper of the vehicle, I believe this PCN was issued in error as I had fully pre-paid for the duration during which the vehicle was parked in Brunel House Car Park.

Yours faithfully....

________________


Once again, many thanks for your help.
Al

if ECP continued to maintain that their NtK was complaint (when chasing payments etc) then they'd probably be committing fraud by misrepresentation.

I'm not convinced that would be the case, whilst operators must respect POPLA decisions in respect of individual cases, they are in theory free to disagree with their conclusions. Even POPLA assessors are free to disagree with the conclusions of another assessor in materially similar circumstances. If a case/cases went to court and were escalated to a sufficiently high enough court to create a precedent that their notices were non-compliant, and they continued to claim the contrary, that might be another matter.

OP - whilst it doesn't say so explicitly, your proposed wording opens the door to a presumption as to who was driving. I'd be more careful with the wording.

I'm not convinced that would be the case, whilst operators must respect POPLA decisions in respect of individual cases, they are in theory free to disagree with their conclusions. Even POPLA assessors are free to disagree with the conclusions of another assessor in materially similar circumstances. If a case/cases went to court and were escalated to a sufficiently high enough court to create a precedent that their notices were non-compliant, and they continued to claim the contrary, that might be another matter.

OP - whilst it doesn't say so explicitly, your proposed wording opens the door to a presumption as to who was driving. I'd be more careful with the wording.

Fair points.

In my opinion the POPLA outcomes don't really change anything anyway - the NtK's clearly do not meet the requirements of PoFA and any claim made, by the parking operator, to the contrary would be demonstrably false since all one has to do is to examine the freely available NtKs.

Our recently submitted appeals clearly point out the failings and so far the operator has been unable / unwilling to rebut the submitted evidence.



It also seems to me that new legislation from the CMA has basically lowered the bar in terms of demonstrating fraud.

If the parking operator makes a false representation to a vehicle keeper which might cause that keeper to make a financial transaction then this could easily be regarded as fraud.

That's just my thoughts.

Any case would of course turn on its facts - in this instance it would probably hinge on when the operator would have reasonably discovered that their NtKs were non PoFA compliant - we have seen many cases where non compliance has been a central appeal point which is totally ignored in the operators responses - one might regard that behaviour as an acknowledgement of the problem.

Just to say my appeal is now logged with ECP and I await its dismissal with an overwhelming sense of inevitability. 😊

This is the text of the appeal I sent (required shortening as ECP only allow a certain number of characters on the form:)

I am appealing this PCN as the registered keeper of EK71JXG. Parking was pre-paid on the Just Park App from 22:30 on 22/01/26 until 19:30 on 23/01/26, booking reference 99882108. I also note from a new search the price would be the same for a stay from 22:15 until 19:45.
Your PCN states the vehicle was parked ‘without a valid Pay by Phone transaction.' A valid Pay by Phone transaction WAS paid for through JustPark, and the car was not parked within a bay except during the time paid for.
I also note the Notice to Keeper does not meet the full requirements of The Protection of Freedoms Act (2012). As a result, you cannot therefore transfer liability to the keeper, and, as I am under no obligation to do so, I will not be identifying the driver.
_______

Watch this space…