We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
POPLA Decisions
Comments
-
Thread: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6606688/grace-period-before-after-paid-period/p1
Context: I parked, paid for a ticket for one hour and then left the car park 01:09:49 later. This was within the BPA's grace period of 10 minutes.
CEL responded with weak evidence - their parking meter didn't even count seconds (although their entry/exit cameras did), and the meter was even set to 1hr ahead of BST. No mention on the signs that parking started from entry time rather than time of the ticket purchase - the ticket also stated an expiry which was one hour ahead of purchase time rather than entry time. Their evidence confused grace period and consideration period pointing out that their signage didn't mention the latter when it did, and then conflating the grace period with the consideration period.
POPLA Result
DecisionSuccessfulAssessor NameRichard BeadenAssessor summary of operator caseThe operator has issued a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) as payment was not made in accordance with the terms and conditions.
Assessor summary of your caseThe appellant believes that the operator is required to allow a grace period. The appellant advises that they paid within 10 minutes of entry. They believe that their parking time started from when they purchased their ticket and not when they entered the car park. They dispute that they formed the contract until they purchased a ticket. They dispute that the landowner has suffered a loss. The appellant has commented on the parking operator’s evidence. In support of their appeal the appellant has provided an image showing the signs, two images to show the transaction of their bank account and an image of google maps.
Assessor supporting rational for decisionWhen assessing an appeal POPLA considers if the parking operator has issued the parking charge notice correctly and if the driver has complied with the terms and conditions for the use of the car park. I am allowing this appeal. I will explain my reasons below. As a member of the British Parking Association the operator is required to comply with the Single Code of Practice. Section 5.1 and 5.2 set out the requirements for both consideration and grace periods. In this case the signs indicate to a driver that they have 10 minutes to make payment as such this is a consideration period. The driver made payment within this time frame. Section 5.2 allows the driver a 10-minute grace period. There is nothing on the signage which advises the driver when their parking time starts as such, I cannot consider that it started until the driver paid for their ticket. The driver paid for their parking after five minutes and left in 75 minutes after purchasing one hour of parking. The driver is permitted 10 minutes grace in addition to their purchased parking time and as such I do not consider that they parked for longer than was permitted. As I am allowing the appeal on this basis, I do not need to consider any other grounds of appeal.
3 -
Well done @Timewarp.There is actually an Appeal Court decision that determines that the point at which the parking contract commences in a P&D car park is at the pressing of the 'green button'.
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2019/854.htmlPrivate Parking world can thank their big-boy buddy NCP for saddling them with that!Please note, we are not a legal advice forum. I personally don't get involved in critiquing court case Defences/Witness Statements, so unable to help on that front. Please don't ask. .
I provide only my personal opinion, it is not a legal opinion, it is simply a personal one. I am not a lawyer.
Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.Private Parking Firms - Killing the High Street3 -
Umkomaas said:Well done @Timewarp.There is actually an Appeal Court decision that determines that the point at which the parking contract commences in a P&D car park is at the pressing of the 'green button'.
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2019/854.htmlPrivate Parking world can thank their big-boy buddy NCP for saddling them with that!1 -
@Wade_Barrett
@Kazaa
@Wolflobo1
@paly4
@AnotherDayAnotherDestiny
@parkingoffender
@Cassius99
@NuckinFutz
@quitetheheadache1
@crossaboutparking
@userno478
@tfo1998
@Bolognese
@andromeda24
@simmo83You all reported POPLA losses this year.
If you want to help to influence the Government's view of POPLA and to push for a proper, impartial single appeals service (as pretty much promised in the 2019 legislation) please read this message:
Please do the Public Consultation by August:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81552148/#Comment_81552148PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
CLICK at the top or bottom of any page where it says:
Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD5 -
@timewarp I read that with great interest. Especially the recognition of the difference between grace and consideration periods as I have today received a POPLA rejection showing a complete lack of consistency;
Summary;
The vehicle entered a McDonalds Car Park 14:03 and departed at 15:48 (1 hour and 45 minutes 22 seconds). The car park had a maximum stay time of 1 hour 30 minutes.
Receipts provided showed purchases at 14:28 and at 15:12.
Standard appeal to UKPC and POPLA appealed;1) Non-compliance with BPA sector single code of practice – Landowner Authority2) No proof of exceeding maximum stay – ANPR technology3) Non-compliance with Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 – Period Parked4) Non-compliance with BPA sector single code of practice – Grace period
But I will just quote the wording used in 4.
"4) Non-compliance with BPA sector single code of practice – Consideration period and Grace periodSection 5 of the BPA sector single Code of Practice refers to duration of parking periods. It opens with the following commentary;“As a matter of contract law, drivers need to be given an appropriate opportunity to understand and decide whether to accept the terms and conditions that apply should they choose to park a vehicle on controlled land. The amount of time needed varies according to the nature and size of the premises, and in car parks open to the public includes the time needed to find and access a vacant parking bay, or to leave the premises should the driver decide not to park, hence the need for a consideration period before the contract between the driver and the parking operator is made. It is also a requirement to allow a grace period in addition to the parking period where parking is permitted, and all terms and conditions have been complied with.”I won’t proceed to copy points 5.1 and 5.2 into this appeal but will refer directly to Annex B which provides “mandatory minima for the consideration and grace periods that parking operators are required to apply in accordance with 5.1 and 5.2”.Table B.1 within Annex B refers to land that is open to the public with free parking for a period of 1 hour or more with less than 500 spaces (which would appear to be the case with McDonalds in *********). The MANDATORY MINIMA is 5-minute consideration period and a 10-minute grace period.The alleged exceeded stay time is 15 minutes, but this does not take into consideration the use of the ‘drive through’ facility or whether the ANPR technology used it accurate. It is clear that UKPC has not applied the MANDATORY minimum times and therefore is non-compliant with the BPA sector single Codes of Practice.I can see that the previous BPA Code of Practice also stated 10 minutes, grace period, but an agreement during a 2015 BPA Professional Development & Standards Board meeting agreed a mandatory 11-minute grace period should be reflected in that version of the Codes of Practice. Therefore should UKPC still be complying with the OLD Code of Practice then a combined consideration period of 5 minutes and a 11 minute grace period would mean 16-minutes of time and therefore the driver did not exceed any such periods."
POPLA Decision;
DecisionUnsuccessfulAssessor NameKevin WoodallAssessor summary of operator caseThe operator has issued the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) due to exceeding the maximum stay.Assessor summary of your caseThe appellant has provided a detailed account surrounding the parking event in question. For the purpose of my report, I have summarised the grounds raised into the points below. • They advise they are the keeper and are not liable for the alleged parking charge. • They say it is non-compliance with the Single Code of Practice and has quoted Section 14 and has said they requested a proof of the landowner agreement; however, this was refused. • They state there is no proof of exceeding the maximum stay and has quoted Section 7.1 • They have said it is non-compliance with Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA) 2012 and has quoted Schedule 4 paragraph 9 regarding the period of parking and states the images show the vehicle arriving and leaving and no photos of the vehicle parked. They also say the site is used for McDonald’s drive through and should not be classed as parked. •They advise that the operator has not applied a consideration or grace period. • They have asked for UKPC to be referred for investigation due to non-compliance with legislation and be suspended until it complies with the basic requirements of the Code of Practice. The appellant has provided a PDF of their appeal. After reviewing the operator’s evidence, the appellant reiterated their grounds of appeal. All of the above has been considered in making my determination.
Assessor supporting rational for decisionWhen assessing an appeal POPLA considers if the operator has issued the parking charge notice correctly and if the driver has complied with the terms and conditions for the use of the car park. The operator has provided photographic evidence of the signage in place in the car park, which detail the terms and conditions of parking. The signs state “…90 MINUTES MAXIMUM STAY…” The motorist is also advised that failure to comply with the terms and conditions will result in a PCN being issued for £100. The operator has provided Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) images to demonstrate how long the vehicle was on site for.
• They advise they are the keeper and are not liable for the alleged parking charge. The appellant has been identified as the keeper; however, they advised the operator they were not the driver. The Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA) 2012 is a law that allows parking operators to transfer the liability to the registered keeper in the event that the driver or hirer is not identified. Parking operators must follow certain rules including warning the registered keeper that they will be liable if the parking operator is not provided with the name and address of the driver. In this case, the PCN in question has the necessary information and the parking operator has therefore successfully transferred the liability onto the registered keeper.
• They say it is non-compliance with the Single Code of Practice and has quoted Section 14 and has said they requested a proof of the landowner agreement; however, this was refused. The Private Parking Sector Single Code of Practice (The Code) sets the standards its parking operators need to comply with. Section 14.1 of the Code states that where controlled land is being managed on behalf of a landowner, written confirmation must be obtained before a parking charge can be issued. In this case, the operator has provided evidence which shows the contract started with the landowner on 15 March 2023 for 12 months and continued after this date and would terminate if 12 weeks’ notice inwriting had been provided. I am satisfied the operator has met the requirements of section 14 and a contract to enforce PCN’s was in place the date the appellant parked.
• They state there is no proof of exceeding the maximum stay and has quoted Section 7.1 Section 7 of the Code says that parking operators may use camera technology to remotely manage a car park so long as this is done so overtly, and in a reasonable, consistent, and transparent manner. The data collected must be accurate, and securely held so it cannot be tampered with. The images show a timestamp of the vehicle arriving at 14:03, and leaving at 15:48. The ANPR information is taken at face value and I am satisfied the information the operator has provided shows how long the vehicle was on site for.
•They have said it is non-compliance with Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA) 2012 and has quoted Schedule 4 paragraph 9 regarding the period of parking and states the images show the vehicle arriving and leaving and no photos of the vehicle parked. They also say the site is used for McDonald’s drive through and should not be classed as parked. I have reviewed PoFA and can see the PCN states the vehicle, the land it remained on and the period it was there for. Section 2.19 of The Code states that parking begins when a vehicle enters and remains on controlled land. In this instance, it was on the land for 1 hour 45 minutes which unfortunately exceeded the maximum stay by 15 minutes.
• They advise that the operator has not applied a consideration or grace period.Section 5.1 of the Single Code of Practice states that parking operators must allow a consideration period of appropriate duration, subject to the requirements set out in Annex B to allow a driver time to decide whether or not to park. In this case, as the vehicle remained on site, the terms were accepted and the consideration period was no longer applicable. Section 5.2 of the Single Code of Practice requires a parking operator to allow a grace period in addition to the parking period. However, the Code advises that grace periods are not applicable to short stay areas where the parking of a vehicle is allowed for a limited period not greater than 30 minutes, such as drop off and pick up zones. In this case… (My note: This is verbatim how this point was received, There is no conclusion to this point)• They have asked for UKPC to be referred for investigation due to non-compliance with legislation and be suspended until it complies with the basic requirements of the Code of Practice. When we carry out an investigation, we are looking if the PCN has been issued correctly. If they want more information on how to report the operator, they can speak to their local Citizens Advice. POPLA’s role is to assess if the operator has issued the charge in accordance with the conditions of the contract. As the terms and conditions of the car park have not been met, as the vehicle exceeded the maximum stay, I conclude that the operator has issued the parking charge correctly, and the appeal is refused.0 -
@Lazos Very annoying that their point regarding the key aspect of your case was cut short. Their process won't allow you to reply to that as your popla appeal is now "done".I guess complain to the land owner to get it cancelled, other than that ignore all further correspondence until the LBC (if at all).0
-
Anyone else noticed that you generally lose if your POPLA assessor has a male name, and are more likely to win with a female assessor?PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
CLICK at the top or bottom of any page where it says:
Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD2 -
Coupon-mad said:Anyone else noticed that you generally lose if your POPLA assessor has a male name, and are more likely to win with a female assessor?1
-
From a very very quick open source check on my POPLA assessors name and 'POPLA', I can see that he has rejected 100% of appeals (3 out of 3).One of which he clearly didn't understand the airport bylaw aspect of the appeal and it appears a complaint was submitted about him.And obviously mine where he stated driving through the drive through counted as being 'parked' and misquoted/misunderstood at least 3 pieces of the Single Code.Oh well none of this changes my situation. I'll probably start a new thread prior to getting any LBC, etc. just so I can get things in order and not feel rushed IF things escalate.2
-
Don't start a new thread if it relates to the same event. It would mean regulars trying to find your details again!0
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 351.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.8K Spending & Discounts
- 244.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.5K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.1K Life & Family
- 257.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards