Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Biglad74
    • By Biglad74 14th Feb 17, 9:43 PM
    • 14Posts
    • 7Thanks
    Biglad74
    Parking Eye Parking ticket.
    • #1
    • 14th Feb 17, 9:43 PM
    Parking Eye Parking ticket. 14th Feb 17 at 9:43 PM
    Hi,
    I have recieved a Parking Charge Notice from Parking Eye for parking in a service area behind a retail park and have a couple of questions:

    1. It says on the notice date of issue 31/01/2017 and gives the offer to pay the discounted rate (60) if paid within 14 days (Today) however the notice didn't arrive on my doormat until 09/02/2017. Is this a tactic by the company of sitting on the ticket until near the 14 day period has expired to pressure me into paying??

    2. In the grey box at the bottom it says they "we have originally written to the registered keeper of the vehicle whose details were held by the DVLA at the time of the parking event and they have informed us that you were responsible for this vehicle at the time of the parkin event"
    Well I am the registered keeper, but they haven't sent anything previously or it hasn't arrived.
    Are they just trying it on or has a first letter gone astray??

    3. They call the area a service yard, but then go on to describe that the signage/car park/appropriate permit-authorisation all relate to a car park.... is this worth pointing out/using as a technicality?

    4. Myself and x3v colleagues were there, all in seperate vehicles (x1 private and x2 marked/liveried) but I am the only one to have recieved a notice. Is it worth calling the cameras accuracy into account as it hasn't recorded the x3 other vehicles.

    5. What is the best course of intial action - say that I am refusing to name the driver or go straight to the appeals process?

    Thanks in anticipation.
Page 1
    • Redx
    • By Redx 14th Feb 17, 10:54 PM
    • 13,730 Posts
    • 16,864 Thanks
    Redx
    • #2
    • 14th Feb 17, 10:54 PM
    • #2
    • 14th Feb 17, 10:54 PM
    1) I doubt it , but all these companies allow the early bird discount bribe in order to scare the gullible into paying , so I suppose its a valid tactic for those who dont know better

    2) sounds like they think its a lease vehicle, so probably a copy and paste template error

    3) yes at popla , no at appeal stage , at appeal stage just use the blue text template "as is" , the idea is to get a popla code , not fall into the trap of arguing with PE and finding that the appeal window "times out"

    4) follow the advice in the NEWBIES sticky thread , hundreds of people on here will tell you the same , because its the tried and tested method , which is why that NEWBIES thread is up to date and is "stuck" near the top of this forum (in theory , you should not have to ask , all you should do is read, and follow those instructions by coupon-mad)

    methinks you are looking too deep into these murky waters, back up and do what the good lady says in that NEWBIES thread , you know it makes sense
    Last edited by Redx; 27-02-2017 at 7:28 PM.
    Newbies !!
    Private Parking ticket? check the 2 sticky threads by coupon-mad and crabman in the Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking Board forum for the latest advice or maybe try pepipoo or C.A.G. or legal beagles forums if you need legal advice as well because this parking forum is not about debt collectors or legal matters per se
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 15th Feb 17, 1:44 AM
    • 45,258 Posts
    • 57,948 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #3
    • 15th Feb 17, 1:44 AM
    • #3
    • 15th Feb 17, 1:44 AM
    Sounds like you have the slam-dunk winning version of a PE PCN, the one with the blank space at the bottom and nothing about keeper liability?!

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?p=71526676

    Easy, easy, easy to see off at POPLA as long as you follow the templates and point out to POPLA that this is not a POFA PCN and you are appealing as keeper (driver NOT identified). The templates will get you through this to cancellation, if that's the PCN you have.
    PRIVATE PCN in England/Wales? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT

    Click on the trail, top of this page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    DON'T read old advice to ignore, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • Biglad74
    • By Biglad74 15th Feb 17, 10:09 AM
    • 14 Posts
    • 7 Thanks
    Biglad74
    • #4
    • 15th Feb 17, 10:09 AM
    Type of notice
    • #4
    • 15th Feb 17, 10:09 AM
    I shall try and scan/upload the notice later today when I get home from work, so it is clear what kind of notice it is. Thanks for your comments/help so far
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 15th Feb 17, 11:07 AM
    • 45,258 Posts
    • 57,948 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #5
    • 15th Feb 17, 11:07 AM
    • #5
    • 15th Feb 17, 11:07 AM
    You don't need to, the link I gave you shows a scan of the 'best' type with the blank space. Also it is really obvious if yours does not state that 'after 29 days from service of the Notice' the registered keeper will be liable.

    We don't need to see, you can check yourself.
    PRIVATE PCN in England/Wales? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT

    Click on the trail, top of this page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    DON'T read old advice to ignore, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • Biglad74
    • By Biglad74 15th Feb 17, 10:35 PM
    • 14 Posts
    • 7 Thanks
    Biglad74
    • #6
    • 15th Feb 17, 10:35 PM
    • #6
    • 15th Feb 17, 10:35 PM
    I'm pretty sure mine has the blank space ath the bottom and is missing the info that you have mentioned.
    I think I have found the letter template page that I need , via a couple of links, I was going to post the links to verify, but as a new user this privilidge is not allowed.
    The post ref. Cockhedge Parking Fine then onto the one titled dropbox.
    Is this correct and if so which letter do I need to use?
    Many Thanks
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 15th Feb 17, 10:38 PM
    • 45,258 Posts
    • 57,948 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #7
    • 15th Feb 17, 10:38 PM
    • #7
    • 15th Feb 17, 10:38 PM
    You don't send a letter and this doesn't need explaining on every thread...the NEWBIES thread tells you which appeal to use for a BPA member. Copy that blue writing appeal into PE's appeal page, choosing 'registered keeper' in their drop-down menu. It is that simple, please no post asking 'is it this one' as we can't stand that any more...!
    PRIVATE PCN in England/Wales? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT

    Click on the trail, top of this page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    DON'T read old advice to ignore, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • Biglad74
    • By Biglad74 16th Feb 17, 10:02 PM
    • 14 Posts
    • 7 Thanks
    Biglad74
    • #8
    • 16th Feb 17, 10:02 PM
    • #8
    • 16th Feb 17, 10:02 PM
    You don't send a letter and this doesn't need explaining on every thread...the NEWBIES thread tells you which appeal to use for a BPA member. Copy that blue writing appeal into PE's appeal page, choosing 'registered keeper' in their drop-down menu. It is that simple, please no post asking 'is it this one' as we can't stand that any more...!
    Originally posted by Coupon-mad
    I understand it must get frustrating repeating the same things over and over again, but (this is a compliment) there is so much information on here it can be a bit overpowering. Some of it links to the same info, but it is easy to get sidetracked or bogged down with all this even on on the Newbies page.
    I think the fear is that if we do not get it 100% then we will leave ourselves open to being kicked in the gonads for the 100. That is certainly the case in my circumstances.
    I appreciate all the help so far .
    I have sent the template via the PE website and kept evidence.
    Any idea on the next step or is it not so set in stone?
    Thanks
    • Redx
    • By Redx 16th Feb 17, 10:15 PM
    • 13,730 Posts
    • 16,864 Thanks
    Redx
    • #9
    • 16th Feb 17, 10:15 PM
    • #9
    • 16th Feb 17, 10:15 PM
    post #3 of the NEWBIES sticky thread (the one you will be become very , very familiar with) , tells you the next step , which is a popla appeal when PE refuse your appeal and issue a popla code

    so you will be told yet again what we tell every newbie

    read the newbies sticky thread
    Newbies !!
    Private Parking ticket? check the 2 sticky threads by coupon-mad and crabman in the Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking Board forum for the latest advice or maybe try pepipoo or C.A.G. or legal beagles forums if you need legal advice as well because this parking forum is not about debt collectors or legal matters per se
    • Biglad74
    • By Biglad74 18th Feb 17, 10:26 AM
    • 14 Posts
    • 7 Thanks
    Biglad74
    OK Thnaks, I have received an automated reply from Parking eye, so I guess I will wait now for the popla code.
    • Biglad74
    • By Biglad74 27th Feb 17, 7:25 PM
    • 14 Posts
    • 7 Thanks
    Biglad74
    Hi,
    I have recieved an email back from Parking Eye informing me that my appeal has been unsuccessful and also present is the Popla Code. Is there a time frame when I need to get my appeal to Popla by?
    Thanks
    • Redx
    • By Redx 27th Feb 17, 7:29 PM
    • 13,730 Posts
    • 16,864 Thanks
    Redx
    28 days , probably on the popla website under their HELP section (did you look ?)
    Newbies !!
    Private Parking ticket? check the 2 sticky threads by coupon-mad and crabman in the Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking Board forum for the latest advice or maybe try pepipoo or C.A.G. or legal beagles forums if you need legal advice as well because this parking forum is not about debt collectors or legal matters per se
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 28th Feb 17, 10:33 AM
    • 45,258 Posts
    • 57,948 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Hi,
    I have recieved an email back from Parking Eye informing me that my appeal has been unsuccessful and also present is the Popla Code. Is there a time frame when I need to get my appeal to Popla by?
    Thanks
    Originally posted by Biglad74
    Read post #3 of the NEWBIES thread and do not be swayed by POPLA saying to write the appeal in your own words and that 'other' is less likely to win. Balderdash!
    PRIVATE PCN in England/Wales? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT

    Click on the trail, top of this page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    DON'T read old advice to ignore, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • wolfeyes71
    • By wolfeyes71 28th Feb 17, 2:31 PM
    • 2 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    wolfeyes71
    Need Advice
    I started a new job and took a friend who worked there as he told me free parking area (Morrisons) in Scotland.I did see a big notice but hard to read as was dark and my light made it unclear.my friend said dont worry its free at back area,many guys been parking here all week,nothing happened.I went back to vehicle all day and no ticket,Now a few days later i get them.What can i do to fight these if i read the sign id have to stop vehicle or maybe hit someone if i didnt.Ive seen so many posts on Private Eye Parking its confusing.Im getting too old for this and new to computers so forgive me for mistakes please
    Last edited by wolfeyes71; 28-02-2017 at 2:36 PM. Reason: more info
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 28th Feb 17, 2:45 PM
    • 45,258 Posts
    • 57,948 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    I started a new job and took a friend who worked there as he told me free parking area (Morrisons) in Scotland.I did see a big notice but hard to read as was dark and my light made it unclear.my friend said dont worry its free at back area,many guys been parking here all week,nothing happened.

    I went back to vehicle all day and no ticket,Now a few days later i get them.What can i do to fight these if i read the sign id have to stop vehicle or maybe hit someone if i didnt.Ive seen so many posts on Private Eye Parking its confusing.Im getting too old for this and new to computers so forgive me for mistakes please
    Originally posted by wolfeyes71
    Not similar to this one but easily solved by emailing a complaint to Morrisons HO, if the store was open and you were allowed to park as a customer?

    If not just IGNORE the letters because you are in Scotland.

    DO NOT TELL THEM WHO WAS DRIVING, NO CONTACT.
    PRIVATE PCN in England/Wales? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT

    Click on the trail, top of this page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    DON'T read old advice to ignore, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • wolfeyes71
    • By wolfeyes71 28th Feb 17, 10:29 PM
    • 2 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    wolfeyes71
    thanks there will be a total of 4/5 tickets ,store was closed but car park always open,problem is i parked there 7/8 hrs at a time.i just went there today looking at signs,they are all facing on left side of road facing right across road like crossing road so id have to stop to read and all are right next to pedestrian crossings, and when dark they go two toned so even harder to make out(basically invisible).it looks like 2 car parks as noone parked where i was as far from store, thanks as i been panicking i have to sell car to pay tickets as been out a job a while and bills mounting.just stareted job !!
    Last edited by wolfeyes71; 28-02-2017 at 10:45 PM. Reason: add info
    • Biglad74
    • By Biglad74 5th Mar 17, 12:04 PM
    • 14 Posts
    • 7 Thanks
    Biglad74
    Ok, so I am in the process of putting together my POPLA appeal and have searched the forum for recent Parkingeye cases.
    Is the following point relevant to my case given that I have recieved a PCN through the post?


    " 1. Parking Eye car park management’s parking Charge Notice is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA) as no Notice To Keeper (NTK) has been issued.

    Parking Eye car park management’s PCN fails to comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA).

    Under schedule 4, paragraph 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, for the creditor (Parking Eye car park management) to have the right to recover any unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the vehicle (myself), certain conditions must be met. These are stated in schedule 4, paragraphs 5, 6, 11, and 12. Parking Eye car park management has failed to fulfil the conditions of paragraph 6; which states that it must have provided myself, as the registered keeper with a notice in accordance with paragraph 9. Paragraph 9 states:-

    The notice must be given by

    (a) handing it to the keeper, or leaving it at a current address for service for the keeper, within the relevant period; or

    (b) sending it by post to a current address for service for the keeper so that it is delivered to that address within the relevant period.

    The burden of proof lies with the operator to demonstrate that it has issued the PCN correctly. No such Notice To Keeper has ever been received since the Penalty Charge Notice was issued on 31st January 2017.

    This means that Parking Eye car park management have failed to act within the 56 day relevant period.
    So, this is a charge that could only be potentially enforced against a known driver. Whilst I am the registered keeper of the car, the driver has never been identified or proven and there is no evidence as to the identity of that individual."

    Many Thanks
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 6th Mar 17, 12:58 AM
    • 45,258 Posts
    • 57,948 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    No, because the postal PCN is the NTK. You can't say NONE was received at all because it was but it was a non-POFA one. You said:

    I'm pretty sure mine has the blank space at the bottom
    So I am pretty sure the template POPLA appeal points include one that talks about a non-POFA ParkingEye PCN, in post #3 of the NEWBIES thread, near where it talks about this sort of PCN from PE.
    PRIVATE PCN in England/Wales? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT

    Click on the trail, top of this page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    DON'T read old advice to ignore, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • Biglad74
    • By Biglad74 12th Mar 17, 11:03 AM
    • 14 Posts
    • 7 Thanks
    Biglad74
    Draft POPLA appeal, kindly please read and comment
    Hi,

    This is my draft appeal to POPLA, would folks be good enough to look over it and let me know your thoughts. Any help, pointers and criticism gratefully received.

    PCN Number: XXXXXXX January 2017
    POPLA reference Code: XXXXXX
    Dear POPLA,

    I write to you as the registered keeper of the vehicle XXXXXXXXXX. I wish to appeal the 100 issued Parking Charge Notice (PCN) by Parking Eye car park management for ‘Parking In No Parking Area.’

    I submit the reasons below to show that I am not liable for the parking charge and would be grateful if you would respectfully consider my appeal:-

    1. ANPR Evidence.
    2. Parking Eye car park management has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact liable for the charge.
    3. No contract was entered into between Parking Eye car park management and the Driver or Registered Keeper
    4. The car park had unclear, non-obvious, non-BPA-compliant signage.


    1. I would question the authenticity of the ANPR photographs taken of the vehicle – most notably the time stamps and location coordinates. On close examination of the photographs, the details (time, location, direction) are added as a black overlay box on-top of the photos in the upper right hand corner. It is well within the realms of possibility for even an amateur to use free photo-editing software to add these black boxes and text with authentic looking Meta data. Not only is this possible, but this practice has even been in use by UKPC, who were banned by the DVLA after it emerged.

    I would challenge Parking Eye to prove that a stationary, highly advanced camera was used to generate these photos (including viewing direction, camera location etc.). I would also challenge Parking Eye that they possess the technology to generate these precise types of photographs, as the date stamps have been applied to the photo in such an amateurish way (there are much more sophisticated ways of hardcoding photo data).

    In addition, the entry photograph show’s vehicle XXXXXXX in the dark with no other significant markings. The exit photograph shows nothing other than the kerb to the near side and the lower part of a vehicle to the off side in the image where the rear registration plate is shown. As there is no marking on the photographs to indicate which specific camera took the photograph, and no other distinguishing features in the feature other than XXXXXXXX, the distinct possibility that the photographs were taken of the vehicle when it was elsewhere and used in this instance cannot be dismissed. I again would challenge Parking Eye car park management to prove the photographs which have been provided to me are indeed genuine.


    2. Parking Eye car park management has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact liable for the charge.

    In cases with a keeper appellant, yet no POFA 'keeper liability' to rely upon, POPLA must first consider whether they are confident that the Assessor knows who the driver is, based on the evidence received. No presumption can be made about liability whatsoever. A vehicle can be driven by any person (with the consent of the owner) as long as the driver is insured. There is no dispute that the driver was entitled to drive the car and I can confirm that they were, but I am exercising my right not to name that person.

    Where a charge is aimed only at a driver then, of course, no other party can be told to pay, not by POPLA, nor the operator, not even in court. I am the appellant throughout (as I am entitled to be), and as there has been no admission regarding who was driving, and no evidence has been produced, it has been held by POPLA on numerous occasions, that a charge cannot be enforced against a keeper without a POFA-compliant NTK. Only full compliance with Schedule 4 of the POFA (or evidence that a keeper was the driver) can cause a keeper appellant to be deemed by POPLA to be the liable party.

    The burden of proof rests with the Operator, because they cannot use the POFA in this case, to show that (as an individual) I have personally not complied with terms in place on the land and cannot show that I am personally liable for their parking charge. Parking Eye car park management has failed to do this.

    The vital matter of full compliance with the POFA was confirmed by parking law expert barrister, Henry Greenslade, the previous POPLA Lead Adjudicator, in 2015:-

    Understanding keeper liability
    “There appears to be continuing misunderstanding about Schedule 4. Provided certain conditions are strictly complied with, it provides for recovery of unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the vehicle.

    There is no ‘reasonable presumption’ in law that the registered keeper of a vehicle is the driver. Operators should never suggest anything of the sort. Further, a failure by the recipient of a notice issued under Schedule 4 to name the driver, does not of itself mean that the recipient has accepted that they were the driver at the material time. Unlike, for example, a Notice of Intended Prosecution where details of the driver of a vehicle must be supplied when requested by the police, pursuant to Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, a keeper sent a Schedule 4 notice has no legal obligation to name the driver. If POFA 2012 Schedule 4 is not complied with then keeper liability does not generally pass.''

    No lawful right exists to pursue unpaid parking charges from a keeper, where an operator is NOT attempting to transfer the liability for the charge using the POFA.
    This exact finding was made in 6061796103 against ParkingEye in September 2016, where POPLA Assessor Carly Law found:

    ''I note the operator advises that it is not attempting to transfer the liability for the charge using the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and so in mind, the operator continues to hold the driver responsible. As such, I must first consider whether I am confident that I know who the driver is, based on the evidence received. After considering the evidence, I am unable to confirm that the appellant is in fact the driver. As such, I must allow the appeal on the basis that the operator has failed to demonstrate that the appellant is the driver and therefore liable for the charge. As I am allowing the appeal on this basis, I do not need to consider the other grounds of appeal raised by the appellant. Accordingly, I must allow this appeal.''

    So, this is a charge that could only be potentially enforced against a known driver. Whilst I am the registered keeper of the car, the driver has never been identified or proven and there is no evidence as to the identity of that individual.


    3. As Parking Eye car park management does not have proprietary interest in the land then I require them to produce an un redacted copy of the contract with the landowner. The contract and any 'site agreement' or 'User Manual' setting out details including exemptions - such as any 'genuine customer' or 'genuine resident' exemptions or any site occupier's 'right of veto' charge cancellation rights - is key evidence to define what Parking Eye car park management is authorised to do and any circumstances where the landowner/firms on site in fact have a right to cancellation of a charge. It cannot be assumed, just because an agent is contracted to merely erect some signs and issue Parking Charge Notices, that the agent is also authorised to make contracts with all or any category of visiting drivers and/or to enforce the charge in court in their own name (legal action regarding land use disputes generally being a matter for a landowner only).

    Witness statements are not sound evidence of the above, often being pre-signed, generic documents not even identifying the case in hand or even the site rules. A witness statement might in some cases be accepted by POPLA but in this case I suggest it is unlikely to sufficiently evidence the definition of the services provided by each party to the agreement.

    Nor would it define vital information such as any exemption clauses, grace periods (which I believe may be longer than the bare minimum times set out in the BPA CoP) and basic information such as the land boundary and bays where enforcement applies/does not apply. Not forgetting evidence of the various restrictions which the landowner has authorised can give rise to a charge and of course, how much the landowner authorises this agent to charge (which cannot be assumed to be the sum in small print on a sign because template private parking terms and sums have been known not to match the actual landowner agreement).

    Parking Eye car park management has failed to produce evidence that it has the authority to form contracts with drivers on this land or to pursue charges. The signs at the car service area in question are unsuitable to inform drivers of the full terms and conditions of what they are entering into by physically entering the car park. Parking Eye car park management clearly relies on contract law, but does not do enough to make clear what the terms and conditions of the contract are, making it far too easy for people to unwittingly fall outside the terms of contract.

    I contend that Parking Eye car park management merely holds a basic commercial licence to supply and maintain confusing signage and to issue parking charge notices as a deterrent.

    In my email appeal to Parking Eye car park management on 16th February 2017 I asked them to provide me with a copy of the contract that it holds with the landowner to entitle it to perform the aforementioned actions. This was so that I could be satisfied that the contract permits Parking Eye car park management to make contracts with drivers in its own right and provides it with full authority to pursue charges, including a right to pursue them in court in its own name.

    Parking Eye car park management has failed to produce any such document in the time period since the PCN was issued on 31st January 2017, despite my request under the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013. None of the requested information was supplied as part of the appeal response, and the appeal response itself appears to be a pro-forma refusal. Were the Parking Eye car park management appeal process anything other than a process by which to appear compliant with BPA guidelines then that information would have been provided in good faith as a matter of course. The fact that it has not been provided indicates that the Parking Eye car park management appeal process is perfunctory and essentially useless.


    Paragraph 7 of the BPA CoP defines the mandatory requirements and I put this operator to strict proof of full compliance:-

    7.2 If the operator wishes to take legal action on any outstanding parking charges, they must ensure that they have the written authority of the landowner (or their appointed agent) prior to legal action being taken.

    7.3 The written authorisation must also set out:

    a. the definition of the land on which you may operate, so that the boundaries of the land can be clearly defined

    b. any conditions or restrictions on parking control and enforcement operations, including any restrictions on hours of operation

    c. any conditions or restrictions on the types of vehicles that may, or may not, be subject to parking control and enforcement

    d. who has the responsibility for putting up and maintaining signs

    e. the definition of the services provided by each party to the agreement

    Furthermore, for the avoidance of doubt, a witness statement to the effect that a contract is or was in place will not be sufficient to provide the necessary detail of the contract terms. Such a witness statement would not comply with paragraph 7 of the BPA Code of Practice as the definition of the exact services provided by Parking Eye car park management would not be fully stated.

    It is not appropriate for a car park such as this to have such a limited amount of signs with such poorly displayed terms, putting the onus clearly on drivers to search carefully for where and how the terms are displayed. It is surely the responsibility of Parking Eye car park management to make the terms of their contract far clearer so that drivers have no doubt whatsoever of any supposed contract they may be entering into. I require Parking Eye car park management to provide evidence as to how clear the terms and conditions are and consider if the methods used are clear enough for this type of car park

    I request that Parking Eye car park management provide concrete evidence that a contract existed between themselves and the driver on the day in question, which meets all the legal requirements of forming a contract. They should include specific detail including an agreement from both parties, clarity and certainty of terms etc. If they are not met then the contract would be deemed “unfair” under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999.


    4. The signs around the service yard detail the terms and conditions of parking. They contain letters in very small writing that are well above head height for the average person (this would be around 1.7 metres according to latest research for adults). This make’s the terms and conditions extremely difficult to read, even when stood under the sign. In fact I have subsequently found the only way the terms and conditions can be read correctly is to take a photograph of the sign and then enlarge it.


    This lack of signage runs counter to section 18 of the BPA Code of Practice which states:

    18.3 Specific parking-terms signage tells drivers what your terms and conditions are, including your parking charges. You must place signs containing the specific parking terms throughout the site, so that drivers are given the chance to read them at the time of parking or leaving their vehicle. Keep a record of where all the signs are. Signs must be conspicuous and legible, and written in intelligible language, so that they are easy to see, read and understand. Signs showing your detailed terms and conditions must be at least 450mm x 450mm.

    As Registered Keeper of the vehicle, I contend that:

    The signage states in very small black lettering against a white background (see photo A). I respectfully suggest the POPLA adjudicator will agree that the words are exceptionally difficult to read and understand, on the photograph I have provided and therefore breach Section 18.3 of the BPA CoP as listed previously.


    The signage information provided by Parking Eye car park management fails the test of being “plain and intelligible.” The question one should be asking is, why warn motorists using tiny black writing against a white background?


    As a POPLA assessor has said previously in adjudication:

    ‘Once an Appellant submits that the terms of parking were not displayed clearly enough, the onus is then on the operator to demonstrate that the signs at the time and location in question were sufficiently clear.’ Parking Eye car park management have failed to do this.

    The alleged breach occurred early during a winter’s morning. It was still dark and the use of dipped headlamps was required (as shown on the arrival picture of the PCN). The sign is positioned in an unlit area of the entrance to the service area (as shown in photo B) and the small lettering was not visible (readable) to be seen by any driver entering the service area at that time of the day in a normal sized car. This is not mitigating circumstances but failure by Parking Eye car park management to ensure that their signs were to be seen accordingly. The BPA Code of Practice section 18, state that clear signage must be erected at each entrance and additional signage installed throughout the area. The signs must be visible at all times of the day; these requirements were not met. I ask this operator to show how their signs appeared on that date, at that time, from the angle of the driver's perspective when entering the site. Equally, I require this operator to show how the entrance signs appear from a driver's seat, not stock examples of 'the sign' in isolation/close-up. I demand strict proof that those signs are visible.

    The BPA Code of Practice, Appendix B, under Contrast and illumination:

    Signs should be readable and understandable at all times.

    Furthermore, the landmark case of Parking Eye v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 establishes that a parking charge will only be valid where signage is clear and the driver therefore able to be fully aware of any charges. Parking Eye car park management has not provided evidence that such signs, if present, were available throughout the car park and visible, from the area where the car was parked at the time of the event.

    I therefore respectfully request that POPLA uphold my appeal and cancel this PCN.

    Yours Sincerely,

    XXXXXX XXXX.
    Last edited by Biglad74; 12-03-2017 at 8:18 PM.
    • Fruitcake
    • By Fruitcake 12th Mar 17, 11:12 AM
    • 38,567 Posts
    • 77,047 Thanks
    Fruitcake
    Redact your VRN NOW!
    Last edited by Fruitcake; 12-03-2017 at 11:17 AM.
    I married my cousin. I had to...
    I don't have a sister.

    All my screwdrivers are cordless.
    "You're Safety Is My Primary Concern Dear" - Laks
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

416Posts Today

3,080Users online

Martin's Twitter