Free Traffic Legal Advice

If the POPLA appeal is unsuccessful, then the decision is not binding on you. You don't pay the invoice.

It will likely go as far as a court claim but the odds of it actually ever reaching hearing are very slim with the outcome usually being a strike out or a discontinuation. We will advise on every step of the way.

HI there, I have had the dreaded response from Popla asking for responses to the Operators response to the appeal. Parking eye's response is 33 pages long! Shows all the Max 1.5 hr Parking Signs on a map of the MacDonalds site, copies of all correspondence between us including Privacy request, Authorisation for me to act on sons behalf etc etc.
Obviously I don't want to dump 33 pages of this on here as it is a repeat of all the emails I have sent, and their responses along with the POPLA process I needed to follow.
The POPLA appeal gives me 1 week to provide comments on the Operators response, which is basically everything they have already sent and saying signs were there, the notice was sent, the acknowledgement of change of address on V5 forms sorted, me being the contact was confirmed etc etc.

I would be enormously grateful for help in how to 'respond to the operator' with my comments which must be in by 26th June. Let me know if you needs to see any of the documents.

I can't see anything new as such, just going on about how clear the signage is and the vehicle had headlights on in the photo and therefore should have seen the 'ample signage' about 1.5 hr parking max stay.
Feeling somewhat overwhelmed and panicked about how to best manage the response to this.
This is what ParkingEye have written, along with supporting documents which include photos of car entering and exiting and a map of the MacDonalds car park pointing out the signage which does apparently show there are several signs but apart from the entrance one, as far as I know, all small and it was dark, not daylight.
Do I just restate what I sent in the appeal?
The ParkingEye response includes all correspondence with dates, the notices, map of the site with signs highlighted, but no reference to any of the 'human stuff' like the disability being raised, sent to wrong address, it was the middle of the night, dark, no other cars in the car park, just dates.
This was what ParkingEye included as a covering note in their response:
Financial Current Value £100.00 Outstanding £100.00 Paid To Date £0.00
Photographs In Out Case History
 01/04/2025 Date of event System check/manual check identified breach of terms and conditions, prior to DVLA request
03/04/2025 Request queued to DVLA for keeper details
04/04/2025 DVLA response received - Success (Legislation Used: POFA_POPLA - Issued To: Keeper)
04/04/2025 Parking Charge Letter Issued - Letter1 - Ltr01-210
13/04/2025 Parking Charge Letter Issued - Letter2 - Ltr02-210
15/04/2025 Letter Issued - Website Appeal Response
15/04/2025 Website Appeal received for this case and is queued for processing. 02/05/2025 Letter Issued - GDPR Request - With Appeal
02/05/2025 Letter Issued - Driver Details Required From Keeper POFA
02/06/2025 Letter Issued - **Unsuccessful POPLA - Pro-Active Rules and Conditions This site is a 1½ hour maximum stay customer car park as clearly stated on the signage (enclosed). 1½ hour max stay. No return within 1 hour. Blue Badge holders – all terms & conditions apply. Park within marked bays No parking on yellow lines/hatched areas We have included a signage plan showing that there are signs situated at the entrance, exit and throughout the car park displaying the terms and conditions of the site. Authority
We can confirm that the above site is on private land, is not council owned and that we have written authority to operate and issue Parking Charge Notices at this site from the landowner (or landowner’s agent).
It must also be noted that any person who makes a contract in his own name without disclosing the existence of a principal, or who, though disclosing the fact that he is acting as an agent on behalf of a principal, renders himself personally liable on the contract, is entitled to enforce it against the other contracting party. (Fairlie v Fenton (1870) LR 5 Exch 169).
It follows that a lawful contract between ourselves and the motorist will be enforceable by us as a party to that contract. Additional Information The BPA has provided clarity to both motorists and parking management companies regarding grace periods which can be found in the Private Parking Single Code of Practice. www.britishparking.co.uk/code-of-practice-and-compliance-monitoring Parkingeye are fully compliant with the Private Parking Sector Single Code of Practice in relation to Grace Periods.
Parkingeye use Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) cameras and not CCTV cameras to monitor car parks. This technology captures and photographs vehicles entering and exiting the car park and compares this data to the maximum stay that vehicles are entitled to and, where applicable, any payment or permit that may relate to the registration captured.
We ensure that all our signage is clear, ample, and in keeping with the Private Parking Sector Single Code of Practice regulations. The signage at this site demonstrates adequate colour contrast between the text and the backgrounds advised in the Private Parking Sector Single Code of Practice. As the images show, the vehicle had its headlights on. This would have rendered the many signs in the car park visible.
Please note, our website appeals portal now asks the appellant to confirm that all supporting evidence relating to the Parking Charge has been attached. This confirmation is displayed in the website appeal document included in this evidence pack. Our ANPR records confirm the vehicle remained in the car park. The car park name, along with the entry and exit times can be found on the parking charge notice.
We have included further records of the vehicle’s movements recorded on the date of the event. Whitelist Lookup –
Whitelist Name Plate Description Start Date/Time End Date/Time Input Date/Time Duration No results The above system extract displays all permits, payments for parking, and terminal entries relating to the vehicle on the date of the parking event.
Please note, if no results are displayed, this confirms that no permit, payment, or terminal entries were recorded. Inbound, Outbound Correspondence and Car Park Signage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Thank you, thank you. I have now submitted that and will keep the forum posted. It is so easy to get blindsided and panicked by the amount of wording, documents and so called 'evidence' they produce. I know it is all to overwhelm and encourage you to 'cave' and just pay the money to make it go away.
I have stepped back, taken a moment, reminded myself that it is all about these awful companies making easy money off the back of people going about their day, who have simply overstayed or not spotted a parking fee sign.
Your help is once again hugely appreciated.

This may also be helpful for people on here to read as this was what the POPLA Assessor outlined as a summary of the case:
"The appellant has provided a detailed account of events. For the purpose of my report, I have summarised the grounds into the following points and have checked each point before coming to my conclusion. The appellant says that: 1. Non-compliance with PoFA 2012 – paragraphs 9(2)(e)(i) and 9(2)(f). 2. Notice not ‘given’ within 14 days. 3. Unclear and insufficient signage in the dark. 4. Failure to consider Equality Act 2010 obligations. 5. Driver not identified – Keeper liability not established. 6. No evidence of landowner authority. The appellant reiterated their version of events in the motorist’s comments section. Assessor summary of reasons"

It just gives a useful overview that I hope others on here can benefit from. Thanks again!

It is still worth posting the full POPLA result, including the name of the Assessor. Just try and add a few paragraph breaks so that it is more easily readable.