POPLA Decisions

estevenin

Horizon PCN, at Tesco Kensington (Cromwell Road).

Link to the full thread, with my appeal and Popla appeal drafts : https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6608305/horizon-pcn-at-tesco/

Decision
Successful

Assessor Name

Jessica Nuttall

Assessor summary of operator case

The parking operator has issued the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) for exceeding the maximum stay

Assessor summary of your case

The 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. • Non-compliance with the Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA) 2012. • Inadequate signage and insufficient notice of the sum of the parking charge. • Lack of evidence of Landowner Authority. The appellant has provided: 1. Appeal doc. 2. Sign. 3. Photo of the car park. After reviewing the operator’s evidence, the appellant has expanded on their grounds of appeal. • The parking operator have added picture of the signs which are supposed to be in the parking lot. • It is noted that, there is no evidence whatsoever, that the signs were there, at the time of the alleged breach of contract. Most live pictures are dated from 2021 / 2022, and no assumption can be made that those signs were there in 2025. • No visible sign at the parking's entrance has been shown, as the Operator's own evidence, page 31, which is like the evidence they have provided. All of the above has been considered in making my determination.

Assessor supporting rational for decision

I am allowing this appeal and will detail my reasoning below: By issuing a PCN the parking operator has implied that the terms and conditions of the private land have not been met. When an appeal is brought to POPLA, the burden of proof begins with the parking operator to demonstrate the breach they claim has occurred. I must therefore assess the terms and conditions of the site, any relevant code of practice, or legislation to determine if the PCN has been issued correctly. In this case the operator has issued the PCN for exceeding the maximum stay period. In the appeal the appellant has explained there isn’t any signage within the charging port bays. They have also provided two images which demonstrate this. The British Parking Association (BPA) has a Code of Practice which set the standards its parking operators need to comply with. Section 19.3 of the Code says parking operators need to have signs that clearly set out the terms. In this case whilst I appreciate the parking operator has provided an image of the sign on page 24 of the case file, they have not provided me with any of the signs in situ therefore i cannot be certain the terms and conditions are clearly advertised. I acknowledge the parking operator have provided a site map on page 18 however this doesn’t demonstrate the location of the signage within the charging bays. I note they have also provided images which have been circled showing the entrance signs on page 31 of the case file. This demonstrates there is a 3 hour stay; therefore, they contradict the terms displayed inside of the site. I have not been able to conclude with the required certainty that this PCN has been issued correctly, from the evidence presented to me. I must allow the appeal. I note the appellant has raised other issues as grounds for appeal, however, as I have decided to allow the appeal for the reason above, I did not feel they required further consideration.