Free Traffic Legal Advice

We need to see the back page of the notice.

Your first port of call should be Premier Inn.

It matters not whether their NtK is PoFA complaint or not. PoFA does not apply for a Scottish resident. As long as the driver is not identified, there is nothing they can do with this.

The odds of a scummy English private parking firm issuing an out of jurisdiction claim to a Scottish resident is almost zero. Issuing a claim in England against a Scottish resident requires much extra paperwork, much higher service costs, and longer timelines. These serial litigation firms operate on bulk automation and won’t invest in bespoke litigation unless the sum is substantial.

The odds of recovery are also almost zero. Scottish defendants are much harder to enforce against. Even if judgment was obtained, enforcement in Scotland requires registration and further procedural steps under the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982.

As PoFA doesn’t apply in Scotland, if the keeper liability route is being used, it’s legally impossible for them to succeed if the driver is not identified, and in this case, the Keeper was not even the driver anyway.

Additionally, a Scottish defendant can challenge jurisdiction or argue forum non conveniens. While not guaranteed to succeed, it adds friction and risk for the claimant.

So, you may as well go through the appeals process, only as the Keeper, if only to frustrate the morons at Horizon, but if, as the end f the day you are not successful in getting it cancelled, you can safely ignore everything else that follows. They will not sue you.

I would appeal as follows:

Subject: Appeal Against PCN – [Insert PCN Reference]

Dear Horizon Parking,

The registered keeper of the vehicle is a Scottish resident and was not the driver at the time of the alleged contravention. The keeper will not be identifying the driver as there is no legal obligation to do so.

Your Notice to Keeper relies on Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 to pursue keeper liability. That statute does not apply in Scotland. Issuing a PoFA-based NtK to a Scottish resident is not just legally futile—it’s procedurally embarrassing.

If this is the level of legal understanding your operation runs on, I suggest you invest in a map and a copy of the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982.

You now have two options:

1. Cancel the PCN and spare yourselves further humiliation.
2. Issue a POPLA code and waste even more money defending a position you’ll inevitably have to concede.

Choose wisely. Until then, cease all correspondence.

Yours sincerely,

[Your Name]

As predicted, a standard "hasn't read the question" denial of appeal (text below). 
Happy to ignore it but also happy to string it along a bit through POPLA if it ends up costing them money!  Any downsides to doing this?

Cheers!

.                                  .                              .

Thank you for your recent correspondence concerning the above-referenced Parking Charge.



Review of your Appeal



The Parking Charge was issued lawfully and in full and proper accordance with the Private Parking Sector Single Code of Practice issued by the British Parking Association (the ‘BPA’).



There are signs located at the entrance to, and within the car park, that state the terms and conditions that apply when parking.



As clearly stipulated on signage within the car park, payment or registration for parking must be made for the full duration of the vehicles stay.  Our systems do not show any evidence of payment or registration made against this vehicle on the incident date.



The signs throughout the car park are clear and comply fully with the BPA’s prescribed rules and regulations.  When parking on private land, it is the driver’s responsibility to ensure they adhere to the terms and conditions of the car park concerned.



As we have not been provided with the name and a serviceable address for the driver/hirer, under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, we do have the right, subject to meeting the requirements of the Act, to recover from the Registered Keeper the amount that remains outstanding. We have obtained the name and address of the registered keeper of the vehicle from the DVLA for the purposes of enforcing this charge.



Given the above, and whilst we have considered your representations carefully, on this occasion your appeal has been rejected, although please see the paragraph below regarding further evidence, receipt of which may enable us to review your case further.



Further Evidence



Although we have rejected your appeal, we would be happy to review the status of your appeal should supporting evidence be provided.



Horizon Parking is unable to process a Transfer of Liability (TOL) until a full name and serviceable address has been provided. Please send the required details via email to TOL@horizonparking.co.uk , along with the Parking Charge reference number and vehicle registration.



To submit the requested evidence, you can do so by resubmitting the appeal form available on our website, www.horizonparking.co.uk or write to us at Horizon Parking Ltd, Finitor House, 2 Hanbury Road, Chelmsford, CM1 3AE.



Until we receive this important evidence, please be advised that the Parking Charge will remain outstanding. However, in good faith, we will hold the current charge rate for an additional 14 calendar days to allow you sufficient time to compile and send the information we require. Once received, we will review the matter further and respond to you accordingly.



We look forward to receiving the above information so we may further consider the Parking Charge for you. Please be aware that Horizon must reserve its rights to pursue the Charge if the evidence requested is not received within the next 14 calendar days.

 

The Charge Amount and Methods of Payment



In good faith, Horizon will hold the charge at the current amount of £57 for a further 14 days from the date of this correspondence to allow you further time to pay.



Payment of the outstanding charge can be made using our 24-hour payment line: 020 8106 0789 or online at Horizon Parking Portal



Alternatively, payment can be made via cheque made payable to Horizon Parking Ltd and posted to Horizon Parking Ltd, Finitor House, 2 Hanbury Road, Chelmsford, Essex, CM1 3AE.



Additional Types of Appeal



If you have no evidence that you wish to submit to us, then you have now reached the end of our appeals procedure.  Although we have rejected your appeal, the Parking On Private Land Appeals (POPLA) provides an independent appeals service. To use this service, you must appeal to POPLA within 28 days of the date of this correspondence.



For full instructions on how to appeal to POPLA, please visit their website at www.popla.co.uk. If you would rather progress this matter by post, please contact our Appeals Office and we will send you the necessary paperwork.



Your POPLA reference number is XXXXXXXXXXXX



Please be advised that if you elect for independent arbitration of your case, you will be required to pay the charge at the full amount and, as such, will no longer qualify for payment at the reduced rate. Please also be advised that POPLA will not accept an appeal where payment is made against the Parking Charge in question.



We are required by law 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, Horizon has 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 sincerely,



Appeals Department

Horizon Parking Limited

Cheers.....I've submitted the POPLA appeal and shall update on the outcome

Simply copy and paste the following rebuttal:

Horizon’s “operator evidence” manages to miss the actual point of the appeal and then confidently argue with a position I have never taken.

For the avoidance of doubt, I do not dispute that the car park is in England. Horizon’s long Google Maps diversion is irrelevant. The location of the car park does not answer the only question that matters for POPLA: on what lawful basis can Horizon pursue me, a Scottish-domiciled registered keeper who was not the driver, for this alleged contractual parking charge?

There are two separate issues here which Horizon have muddled together:

1. Who could ever have entered into a parking contract?
2. Whether there is any lawful route to transfer liability from that person to me as keeper.

On the first point, the only person who can possibly have entered into a parking contract is the driver. Only the driver was on site, saw any signs, and could have agreed to any terms. I am the registered keeper. I was not the driver. Horizon has produced no evidence to the contrary. Their assertion that “the appellant entered a valid contract” is therefore simply untrue: the “appellant” in this POPLA case is the keeper, and the keeper was not present.

On the second point, Horizon’s entire argument rests on waving PoFA Schedule 4 around and saying “this parking event occurred in England, therefore PoFA applies, therefore the keeper can be held liable”. That is legally sloppy. The Department for Transport’s own guidance expressly describes Schedule 4 as a regime for recovering unpaid private parking charges “on private land in England and Wales” and the sector’s own material openly recognises that Schedule 4 does not apply in Scotland and does not create keeper liability there. In Scotland, only the driver can be liable for a private parking charge. The fact that the alleged breach took place in England does not magically switch on an English keeper-liability regime against a Scottish consumer sitting in Glasgow.

As a Scottish-domiciled private individual, any realistic civil claim against me would have to be brought in Scotland and determined under Scots law. There is no Scottish equivalent of PoFA Schedule 4 in force. Horizon’s suggestion that they can “hold the Registered Keeper liable under PoFA” in circumstances where the keeper is domiciled in a different legal jurisdiction, which has deliberately not adopted keeper liability, is wishful thinking dressed up as law. A Google Maps screenshot of Boston does not extend the territorial reach of an English statute into Scotland.

Horizon also make much of the idea that I have been “given opportunities” to name the driver, as if that somehow cures their problem. It does not. There is no legal obligation on a Scottish keeper to identify the driver in these circumstances. If the driver is not named, the only question is whether there is any lawful keeper-liability mechanism that can apply. Here there is not. Horizon’s repeated failure to separate “where the car park is” from “what law can be used to pursue this particular consumer in their home jurisdiction” is the core error in their reasoning.

So the position for POPLA is simple. I am the registered keeper, resident in Scotland. I have clearly stated I was not the driver and Horizon has not proved otherwise. Outside PoFA, there is no general principle that makes a keeper liable for a driver’s alleged breach. PoFA’s keeper-liability regime does not operate against a Scottish-domiciled keeper. Horizon has therefore failed to show any lawful basis on which this charge can be enforced against me. Their submission consists largely of a geography lesson and a misstatement of who supposedly entered into a contract. On the evidence before you, the only person who could potentially be liable is the unidentified driver, who is not a party to this appeal. The appeal must therefore be allowed.