IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

CP Plus response, Pre POPLA decision - Advice needed please!

Options

Hi All,

I received a PCN from CP Plus, appealed based on an overstay at TKmaxx due to dehydration and feeling unwell, but they rejected it.

I then appealed to POPLA on the further grounds below, now CP Plus has replied, and POPLA has asked for my input before making a decision.

I just found this forum yesterday, so did the mistake of appealing as the driver and didn't use the newbies guidance..

Grounds of POPLA appeal:

1. Entrance Signage Non-Compliance

2. Inadequate Terms and Conditions Signage

3. Grace Period Considerations

4. Medical Emergency and Judgement Impairment

 Considering that I have overstayed more than 10mins (the grace period), and can't provide evidence of the medical emergency (this is silly cause who would think about trying to find an evidence when they're unwell!), I still think that the first two points about the entrance and T&Cs signage remain, I went through BPA & IPC single Code of Practice fully and constructed the arguments. I'm planning to reply on all the 4 points, as I can't bring in new grounds now.

 I DONNOT WANT TO PAY THESE ****!

 Could you please give some advise?

I will provide the gounds details below in separate posts with photos...
«1

Comments

  • 1. Entrance Signage Non-Compliance

    As per BPA & IPC single Code of Practice 3.1.1 and 3.1.2, an entrance sign must clearly display information regarding parking terms and conditions, including payment and restrictions. However, the entrance sign at XXX Retail Park car park does not meet these requirements for the following reasons:

    3.1.2 (a): There is no clear indication that terms and conditions apply to parking on the site in a suitably sized font. The use of the phrase "parking controls" on the entrance sign is ambiguous and open to multiple interpretations, which leaves drivers unclear about the actual parking restrictions and terms they are expected to follow.

    3.1.2 (b): There is no visible statement regarding whether payment is required, or if free parking is only available for a limited period.

    3.1.2 (e): The sign does not specify where payment can be made or whether on-site cash payment is available, which is a key piece of information for drivers.

     Additionally, in breach of Annex A, A.1.1 and A.1.3, the entrance signage does not clarify the parking tariff or payment terms, nor does it include any items from Group 1 of Table A.1. Furthermore, the Group 2 text is much smaller than 50% of the Group 1 text, violating A.2.1. This lack of clear information places drivers in a disadvantageous position. I will attach a photo of the entrance sign for your reference.

    CP Plus response:

    You claim that the signage is not clear. We can confirm that the signage is displayed in compliance with all relevant laws and regulations – please see images and photographs provided in Section F which support this.

     

    My further argument:

    I will reiterate my argument as it still stands, they just helped me with providing further recent photos as I used the ones from Google maps. What do you think?

  • 2. Inadequate Terms and Conditions Signage

    According to 3.1.3 and 3.1.4, signs displaying the specific terms and conditions, including the parking charge for breaches, must be placed in locations where drivers can read them either when parking or when leaving their vehicle. However, no such signage was visible near the payment machines or along the path to the TKMaxx store I visited.

     To further support this, I will attach photos of the two on-site payment machines showing the absence of any visible parking charge information. Additionally, I will provide an older photo from the same location (obtained online) showing how the parking charge used to be clearly displayed, making it clear that 3.1.3 (j) has been deliberately breached in order to penalise drivers and issue maximum fines of £100. This practice clearly contradicts the fair operation of the car park.

    CP Plus response:

    We advised that clear signs at the entrance of this site and throughout inform drivers of the need to pay for any stay exceeding 45 minutes, and it is not possible to access any part of the

    premises without passing multiple signs. By parking the vehicle on the site Mr XX entered into a valid contract and agreed to abide by its terms and conditions. The ample signage displayed throughout the site advises the terms and conditions of use. One of the conditions is that this is a pay to park site with a free 45 minute period. The signage advises that a Parking Charge of £100 will be issued when allowing your vehicle to remain on site in excess of the free period without making payment for parking.

     It is the driver’s responsibility to ensure they comply with the terms and conditions of the site. In this case, by allowing the vehicle to remain on site for 25 minutes in excess of the free 45 minute period, without

    paying for parking, Mr XX breached those terms and conditions.

    My further argument:

    Still I will reiterate my argument as it still stands, all the T&Cs signs were away from the payment machines and are behind where I parked on lighting columns. Like seriously, why did they put none of them near any of the 6 payment machine on site?!


  • 3. Grace Period Considerations

    In line with Table B.1, the BPA and IPC guidelines require a consideration period of 5 minutes and a grace period of 10 minutes. Based on these allowances, the total overstay should only be considered 10 minutes. Since the parking tariff for up to 1 hour and 45 minutes is only £1, any overstay beyond this amount leads to a charge that can only be seen as punitive, as it does not reflect any genuine loss to the operator. The excessive fine of £100 is disproportionate and does not align with the principles of fairness and transparency as outlined by the Parking Eye vs Beavis case.

    CP Plus response:

    I assume they copied and pasted a ready-made argument as soon as they saw "Parking Eye vs Beavis case", two pages of waffling - please let me know if you want me to put them here.

    My further argument:

    Any advice?


    4. Medical Emergency and Judgement Impairment

    I would also like to highlight that the overstay was due to an unexpected medical issue that occurred while I was shopping at TKMaxx. While in the store, I suddenly felt dizzy and dehydrated, making it unsafe for me to continue immediately. The staff at TKMaxx kindly provided me with water and a seat to rest. You can verify this by contacting the TKMaxx staff who were present at the time.

    I left the store a couple of minutes before it closed (at 20:00) and remained in my car for approximately 10 minutes afterward to ensure I was well enough to drive, as confirmed by CCTV footage and the time I left the car park (20:08).

    At the time, I did not have a clear sense of time due to my medical condition, which impacted my judgment. However, I now understand that I left just before 20:00 because I know the store’s closing time.

    After leaving, I went directly to my hotel to rest, as I reside in XXX but was in XXX for work purposes only.

    Considering these extenuating circumstances, including the non-compliance with signage regulations, the grace periods stipulated by the Code of Practice, and the medical issues I faced, I respectfully request that you waive the PCN. I will attach all the supporting photographs and documentation for your review.

    CP Plus response:

    While we appreciate that Mr XXX was feeling unwell, he could have paid for his parking to extend his stay and avoid incurring a parking charge. Our position remains that we have received no mitigating circumstances or evidence for which we should cancel the Parking Charge. We maintain Mr XXX entered into a valid contract and should pay the valid parking charges as per the signage on the site.

    My further argument:

    I obviously told them then to check with Tkmaxx staff, but it's been nearly three month now, and I obviously can't provide any tangible evidence. Any advice?

     

    I have until Friday to respond to POPLA.
    Many thanks for your help.
  • Gr1pr
    Gr1pr Posts: 8,029 Forumite
    1,000 Posts First Anniversary Photogenic Name Dropper
    Show us your proposed POPLA comments response please 

    You should only comment on anything you can use within their evidence pack to assist your appeal, no additional evidence etc , just comments on their response using anything that helps your case and diminishes theirs 

    Popla comments should be short and concise, bullet points, nothing like your Popla appeal and nothing like their response 

    POPLA comments are limited to 9999 characters, including punctuation. ( Think of it as maybe half of an A4 sheet of paper. )
  • Thank you Gr1pr. Here is my proposed response, all in 4865 charecters.

    My response to CP Plus before POPLA decision:

    1. Entrance Signage Non-Compliance

    • CP Plus claims that "clear signs at the entrance of this site and throughout inform drivers of the need to pay," yet they fail to address my specific concerns about the entrance signage’s failure to meet BPA & IPC Code requirements.

      • Non-Compliant Wording: The term “parking controls” on the entrance sign is vague and does not clearly state the necessity for payment or outline parking restrictions. This violates 3.1.2(a), which mandates clear communication of applicable terms.
      • Omission of Payment Information: There is no indication on the entrance sign about the need to pay for extended stays or how payment can be made (3.1.2(b) & (e)). The lack of visible information regarding payment locations or options is misleading.

    • Recent photos from CP Plus confirm that signage is still inadequate and not in compliance with BPA/IPC standards. The absence of essential information (Group 1 details per Annex A, A.1.1, A.1.3, and Group 2 details per A.2.1) disadvantages drivers by failing to convey critical terms at the entrance.

  • Inadequate Terms and Conditions Signage

    • CP Plus has not refuted the fact that no terms and conditions signage is placed near the payment machines on site, making it difficult for drivers to understand the terms and conditions when making a payment or to check any restrictions.

      • This can clearly be seen in Section F of CP Plus response, where the plan and photos show clearly that no T/C signs are facing TKmaxx (where I parked and visited) and the nearest payment machine in front of Poundland, all facing away, not one, but all. This doesn’t comply with 3.1.3 and 3.1.4 requirements, which state that terms and conditions must be visible upon parking or before leaving the vehicle.
      • The placement of T&Cs solely on lighting columns, none to be seen near the shops or facing them, also seems intentionally inconvenient, as drivers are unlikely to walk to distant lighting columns after parking or paying. This setup reduces the likelihood of a driver fully understanding the parking terms, undermining the operator’s claim of "ample signage."

  • Grace Period Observance

    • CP Plus states that grace periods are applied in line with BPA Code of Practice, yet they do not address the cumulative consideration of grace periods for both parking duration and exiting the site.

      • BPA’s guidelines suggest a total consideration period of at least 15 minutes (5 minutes to read terms and 10 minutes for leaving the car park). My alleged overstay of 25 minutes only marginally exceeds this, making the fine disproportionate.
      • CP Plus’s suggestion that I should have read the signage before exiting overlooks the absence of clear terms near the payment machines, which left no clear opportunity to check the terms without walking far from where I parked.

  • Medical Emergency - Mitigating Circumstances

    • While CP Plus acknowledges my medical condition, they argue I should have extended my stay by paying. However, this disregards the immediate physical impairment I experienced, which impacted my ability to act rationally in the moment.
      • Verification Challenge: I suggested that CP Plus verify my situation with TKMaxx staff, but it’s understandable that a store might not retain records after several months.
      • Unforeseeable Situation: My condition could not have been anticipated and falls under the principle of “Frustration of Contract,” which CP Plus dismissed without addressing my valid grounds for being temporarily incapacitated.
    • Given the unexpected nature of my illness and the lack of immediate signage at payment points to inform me of extended payment options, penalising me for failing to act during a medical emergency seems unjust and disproportionate.

  • Application of Beavis vs. Parking Eye Case (Misinterpretation)

    • CP Plus attempts to justify the charge by referencing Beavis vs. Parking Eye, but this comparison is not applicable here.
      • Unclear Contract Terms: Unlike the Beavis case, this car park’s unclear signage prevents drivers from understanding their obligations upfront, thus failing to establish a legally binding contract based on informed consent.
      • Disproportionate Penalty: The Beavis ruling was specific to high-demand retail spaces and does not automatically apply to every case. In my situation, where a minor overstay was due to unavoidable medical reasons, the charge is punitive rather than compensatory.

    Conclusion

    Given the following key points:

    • Non-compliance of entrance and terms signage with BPA/IPC codes, failing to communicate essential information;
    • The lack of clear signage around payment machines, leaving drivers uninformed of terms and conditions at crucial locations;
    • Misapplication of the Beavis ruling to this case, where the contract was unclear due to inadequate signage;
    • The medical emergency, which rendered me temporarily unable to make payment;

    I respectfully request that this charge be cancelled. The car park’s insufficient signage combined with my unexpected medical issue means that I could not have reasonably foreseen or prevented this overstay.


  • Sorry, for the hard read, not sure why formatting got missed up after posting the comment, I had them all formated similar to the first point with multi-level bullet points! Can seem to be able to edit it now.
  • Gr1pr
    Gr1pr Posts: 8,029 Forumite
    1,000 Posts First Anniversary Photogenic Name Dropper
    Newbies cannot edit posts, not until your status changes to Forumite 

    Still seems overly long to me 
  • I got the count form POPLA website, less than 50% of the limit.
  • Coupon-mad
    Coupon-mad Posts: 151,291 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    edited 13 November 2024 at 7:50PM
    This POPLA appeal will be lost but no worries. Overstay appeals almost never win. I'm just preparing you for the inevitable refusal. You will never pay this PCN.

    Remove this because it is wrong:

    • Grace Period Observance

      • CP Plus states that grace periods are applied in line with BPA Code of Practice, yet they do not address the cumulative consideration of grace periods for both parking duration and exiting the site.

        • BPA’s guidelines suggest a total consideration period of at least 15 minutes (5 minutes to read terms and 10 minutes for leaving the car park). My alleged overstay of 25 minutes only marginally exceeds this, making the fine disproportionate.
        • CP Plus’s suggestion that I should have read the signage before exiting overlooks the absence of clear terms near the payment machines, which left no clear opportunity to check the terms without walking far from where I parked.


    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 THREAD
  • This POPLA appeal will be lost but no worries. Overstay appeals almost never win. I'm just preparing you for the inevitable refusal. You will never pay this PCN.

    Remove this because it is wrong:

    • Grace Period Observance

      • CP Plus states that grace periods are applied in line with BPA Code of Practice, yet they do not address the cumulative consideration of grace periods for both parking duration and exiting the site.

        • BPA’s guidelines suggest a total consideration period of at least 15 minutes (5 minutes to read terms and 10 minutes for leaving the car park). My alleged overstay of 25 minutes only marginally exceeds this, making the fine disproportionate.
        • CP Plus’s suggestion that I should have read the signage before exiting overlooks the absence of clear terms near the payment machines, which left no clear opportunity to check the terms without walking far from where I parked.


    I liked that, damaged my hope and rebuilt it in the same sentence!  :D

    I will delete the grace period bits.

    But if you're sure that POPLA will refuse it, how come a court case will succeed, considering that I won't have any more grounds? Or there will be no court hearing anyway and the case will be dismissed beforehand?

    Regarding points 1 and 2, I still believe that CP Plus haven't followed the BPA & IPC Code fully.. regardless whether POPLA will consider these or not.


  • Meet your Ambassadors

    🚀 Getting Started

    Hi new member!

    Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

    Categories

    • All Categories
    • 350.8K Banking & Borrowing
    • 253K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
    • 453.5K Spending & Discounts
    • 243.8K Work, Benefits & Business
    • 598.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
    • 176.8K Life & Family
    • 257K Travel & Transport
    • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
    • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
    • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

    Is this how you want to be seen?

    We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.