3. Group Nexus / Forestry England - Unpaid parking - Leigh Woods
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic: Group Nexus / Forestry England - Unpaid parking - Leigh Woods  (Read 1713 times)

0 Members and 59 Guests are viewing this topic.

Group Nexus / Forestry England - Unpaid parking - Leigh Woods
« on: »
Hello,

I'm the registered keeper of the vehicle.

Received the following notice through the post about a unpaid parking in a Forestry England car park which has parking enforced by Group Nexus. Ticket wasn't purchased due to issue with phone signal and no other means to pay.

Issued 27/01/26.

Charge £50 reduced to £25 if paid within 14 days.

Interested in thoughts on the letter and Group Nexus.

https://ibb.co/ZRwPQB40
https://ibb.co/cKGRVvGc
https://ibb.co/Xf3VrFPy

Thanks
 
Logged

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook

Re: Group Nexus / Forestry England - Unpaid parking - Leigh Woods
« Reply #1 on: »
If this is land owned/managed by Forestry England, it would seem to be land subject to the Forestry Commission Byelaws. Some of those byelaws control parking on Forestry Commission land - this would mean it is not "relevant land" as defined by paragraph 3 of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA):

Quote
3(1)In this Schedule “relevant land” means any land (including land above or below ground level) other than—

(a)a highway maintainable at the public expense (within the meaning of section 329(1) of the Highways Act 1980);

(b)a parking place which is provided or controlled by a traffic authority;

(c)any land (not falling within paragraph (a) or (b)) on which the parking of a vehicle is subject to statutory control.

As a result of this, they cannot rely on PoFA to recover the charges from you as the registered keeper of the vehicle, despite the letter's claims to the contrary (we can deal with that later). As a result, assuming you are the keeper, you can appeal along the lines of the below, as the keeper only:


Dear Sirs,

I have received your Parking Charge Notice (Ref: ______) for vehicle registration mark _______, in which you allege that the driver has incurred a parking charge. I am appealing as the registered keeper of the vehicle. There is no obligation for me to name the driver and I will not be doing so. The car park at Leigh Woods forms part of land under the management and control of Forestry England. As such, parking on the site is subject to the Forestry Commission Byelaws 1982, meaning it is not "relevant land" for the purposes of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act. Accordingly, you are unable to recover the charges from me as the registered keeper.

I am therefore unable to help you further with this matter, and look forward to your confirmation that the charge has been cancelled. If you choose to decline this appeal, you must issue a POPLA code.

Yours,

If appealing online, be careful there are no drop down/tick boxes that cause you to identify who was driving, and keep a close eye on your spam folder for their response. If they do not respond within 28 days, chase them.
Logged
Re: Group Nexus / Forestry England - Unpaid parking - Leigh Woods
« Reply #2 on: »
Appreciate the detailed response. Will let you know how it goes.
Logged
Re: Group Nexus / Forestry England - Unpaid parking - Leigh Woods
« Reply #3 on: »
I've had the response. It looks like they're still holding the registered keeper liable for the charge:

Dear Sir/Madam,

Thank you for your correspondence relating to your Parking Charge: xxxxxxxxx

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 £25 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. Should you appeal to POPLA, and your appeal is rejected for any reason, you will also lose your right to pay at the reduced rate.

Please find below the payment options:

Online payment website: https://nexusplatform.co.uk/pcn
Post: Cheques or Postal Orders to: PO Box 1750, Northampton, NN1 9PN - made payable to CP Plus Limited

----------

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 letter.  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 (please note this reference is for use only when appealing to POPLA): xxxxxxxx

Please note that if your appeal does not relate to the above criteria or is rejected by POPLA for any reason, you will no longer qualify for payment at the reduced rate. 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 Limited
Logged
Re: Group Nexus / Forestry England - Unpaid parking - Leigh Woods
« Reply #4 on: »
No, they’ve completely ignored your appeal point. It’s what they do. If they accept your appeal, they get £0. If they reject, you may well pay up. They only want your money.

You need to appeal to POPLA, spelling out and quoting the legislation underpinning your appeal point, but there’s no hurry given that you have something like 33 days in which to appeal. If you post your proposed appeal here first, we can help. Assume the POPLA assessor is stupid and needs to be led through the implications.
« Last Edit: February 04, 2026, 03:04:07 pm by jfollows »
Logged
Re: Group Nexus / Forestry England - Unpaid parking - Leigh Woods
« Reply #5 on: »
Thank you. I hope you'll forgive me but I have taken to AI to help me understand 'relevant land' and 'statutory control' etc but think I've got the grasp of it and why Schedule 4 of PoFA doesn't apply here. It's also helped draft an appeal. I have tweaked bits so would appreciate your thoughts on it. Thanks again:
Quote
Ground of appeal: The operator has no keeper liability as the land is not “relevant land” under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.

I am the registered keeper of the vehicle. I was not the driver and the driver has not been identified.

The operator asserts that it is pursuing the registered keeper under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (“PoFA”). This is incorrect as the location in question is not “relevant land” for the purposes of PoFA.

The site forms part of Leigh Woods, which is land managed by Forestry England on behalf of the Forestry Commission.

Parking on this land is governed by the Forestry Commission Byelaws 1982, made under section 46 of the Forestry Act 1967. These byelaws are statutory in nature and regulate conduct on the land, including the payment of charges and penalties for non-compliance.

As such, parking on this land is “subject to statutory control”.

Paragraph 3 of Schedule 4 PoFA defines “relevant land” and expressly excludes:

“any land on which the parking of a vehicle is subject to statutory control.”

Because Forestry Commission byelaws apply, this land is excluded from the definition of relevant land.

Keeper liability therefore cannot arise.

As the keeper, I am under no legal obligation to name the driver and have not done so.

In the absence of relevant land, and driver identification, the operator has no lawful basis to pursue the registered keeper.

Conclusion
As the land is subject to statutory control and is not relevant land under Schedule 4 PoFA, keeper liability does not apply. The appeal must therefore be allowed and the Parking Charge Notice cancelled.
« Last Edit: February 04, 2026, 07:56:37 pm by bristol-car »
Logged
Re: Group Nexus / Forestry England - Unpaid parking - Leigh Woods
« Reply #6 on: »
Looks good.

Stays bang on point.

Excellent work.
Logged
Re: Group Nexus / Forestry England - Unpaid parking - Leigh Woods
« Reply #7 on: »
This is a good draft. Whilst it might feel like labouring the point, I'd be tempted to include a PDF copy of the byelaws in your submission, just because they come up far less often than (for example) airport byelaws.
Logged
Re: Group Nexus / Forestry England - Unpaid parking - Leigh Woods
« Reply #8 on: »
Thanks all. Submitted it to POPLA. Will update as soon as I have one.
Logged
Re: Group Nexus / Forestry England - Unpaid parking - Leigh Woods
« Reply #9 on: »
Keep an eye out to see if the parking operator updates their evidence.
Logged
Re: Group Nexus / Forestry England - Unpaid parking - Leigh Woods
« Reply #10 on: »
Hi all,

I've had a response on POPLA. There's 50 odd pages of photos of signs and all the past correspondence but this is just the text of their response:
Quote
Section B: Case Summary and rules/conditions
Case Summary
The Parking Charge was issued under POFA. In response to the Parking Charge Mr xxxxxx, who
we are pursuing as the Registered Keeper, appealed stating that the Parking Charge was not POFA
compliant.
Rejecting his appeal, we advised that clear signs at the entrance of this site and throughout inform
drivers of the need to pay for parking, and it is not possible to access any part of the premises
without passing multiple signs.
By parking the vehicle on the site the driver entered into a valid contract and agreed to abide by its
terms and conditions. The ample signage displayed throughout the site advises the terms and
conditions of use. One of the conditions is that this is a pay to park site. The signage advises that a
Parking Charge of £50 will be issued when allowing your vehicle to remain on site without making
payment for parking.
It is the driver’s responsibility to ensure they comply with the terms and conditions of the site. In this
case, by allowing the vehicle to remain on site for 51 minutes without paying for parking, the driver
breached those terms and conditions.
Valid payments at this site generate electronic permits. We have included in Section G a copy of the
permit search, which confirms that this vehicle did not hold a valid permit for this site on the day in
question, which means the driver did not pay for parking. We note that Mr xxxxxx has not
claimed that the driver paid for parking nor has any evidence been provided to show as such.
We can confirm that the signage is displayed in compliance with all relevant laws and regulations –
please see images and photographs provided in Section F which support this.
As the keeper did not provide us with details of the driver on the day in question we are pursuing
them as the registered keeper. We can confirm that the Notice to Keeper advises that if the amount
requested in the Notice has not been paid in full (or we have not been informed of the driver's name
and current address), the registered keeper, will, subject to the conditions of, and under the terms of
Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, be liable to pay the unpaid Parking Charge.
We can confirm that the Charge was issued on 27/01/2026 and therefore deemed to be delivered on
29/01/2026, the contrary has not been proven. As such, the Charge was issued within PoFa time
limits. We have included in Section C a copy of the Parking Charge which states the “This Charge is
given to you under Paragraph 9(2)(f) of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.”.
We can confirm that we have the authority to act on behalf of the landowner. The onus is on the
appellant to provide evidence to support their claim that we do not - if the appellant genuinely
believes that we do not have such authority, they are to go to the BPA to obtain this information. The
photographs included in Section F show that signage and equipment is in place at the site to manage
the function of enforcement and this cannot happen without the landowner’s authority.
Our position remains that we have received no mitigating circumstances or evidence for which we
should cancel the Parking Charge. We maintain that Mr xxxxxx entered into a valid contract and
should pay the valid parking charges as per the signage on the site

They haven't mentioned anything about relevant land. Am I right in thinking I should just stand my ground that "The operator has no keeper liability as the land is not “relevant land” under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012."

Thanks
Logged
Re: Group Nexus / Forestry England - Unpaid parking - Leigh Woods
« Reply #11 on: »
That would be my reading, yes.

The fact that POPLA ignored your only appeal point completely requires a formal complaint also, I suggest, although it won’t reverse their meaningless decision.

Nexus have used DCB Legal in the past, so there is a well trodden path to a court claim followed by a discontinuation; search the forum if you’re not familiar with this. Ignore DCBL and come back when you get a Letter of Claim from DCB Legal.
« Last Edit: February 25, 2026, 02:10:16 pm by jfollows »
Logged
Re: Group Nexus / Forestry England - Unpaid parking - Leigh Woods
« Reply #12 on: »
Sorry i wasn't clear. This is the response from the operator. POPLA haven't ruled/assessed yet.
Logged
Re: Group Nexus / Forestry England - Unpaid parking - Leigh Woods
« Reply #13 on: »
Ah, OK.
So your response could be simple - the Parking Charge could not have been issued under PoFA as claimed, reattaching the byelaws etc. The registered keeper can not be liable because the driver has not been identified. The rest is irrelevant. The driver may have entered into a contract, but not Mr xxxxx as claimed, who is the registered keeper.
Basically dispute any of their claims with which you disagree because otherwise it could be claimed that you agree with them.
Logged
Re: Group Nexus / Forestry England - Unpaid parking - Leigh Woods
« Reply #14 on: »
For example:

The operator asserts that the parking charge was issued under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA), but has made no attempt to refute my evidence demonstrating that the site in question is not "relevant land" for the purposes of PoFA.

As part of my appeal I attached a copy of the Forestry Commission Byelaws 1982, made under section 46 of the Forestry Act 1967. These byelaws confirm that the land in question is subject to statutory control, and is therefore not relevant land. Accordingly, the charge cannot be pursued against me as the registered keeper and the appeal should be upheld.

The operator asserts that they have authority to manage parking on the site, and that they hold a valid contract with the landowner, but have failed to prove this to the civil standard required at POPLA. I assert that if they held a valid contract to enforce parking on this site, they would have been able to provide a copy of this as part of their evidence pack. As they have not provided any evidence of a valid contract with the landowner, it must be assumed they do not hold one, and accordingly the appeal should be upheld.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2
« previous next »
  3. Group Nexus / Forestry England - Unpaid parking - Leigh Woods