Euro Car Parks - Lease Vehicle - Notice to Hirer Received - POPLA Appeal Successful

Gr1pr

Do not overthink this,  deal with what arrived at the hirers address, or didn't arrive,  don't get involved in the to and fro between hire company and parking company , don't get involved in the minutia

The hirer can only deal with liability,  or lack of liability,  based on what the law says and what came in the post

What the other parties do or fail to do is their problem 

No blabbing about who was driving 

Coupon-mad

You do not need to check.  The fact that no enclosures arrived with a NTH is fatal to the liability.

Nellymoser

garym71 said:
I've signed the petition and will pass the link onto my friend and others I know to sign. It's a shame there isn't a way to better publicise the petition to give it a wider reaching audience other than the people who visit these forums.

I'm afraid even posting about the petition on Parking forums doesn't generate a huge number of signatures. So thanks for signing and sharing.
The petition (which had to be relauched after the general election) creator is 86yrs. 
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/701453

Read in the Updates here:
https://www.change.org/p/last-chance-saloon-fight-the-parking-cowboys
about his experience with Excel Parking and what he's done to raise awareness of his new UK Parliament petition.

LDast

The responsibility for ensuring compliance with PoFA 2012 Schedule 4 lies with EPC, not the lease or hire company. Under paragraph 14(2) of PoFA, ECP can only hold the hirer liable if they have fully complied with all the requirements, including obtaining copies of the necessary documents from the lease company before issuing a Notice to Hirer (NtH).

If the lease company failed to provide the additional two documents (a copy of the hire agreement and a copy of the statement of liability signed by the hirer), then ECP should not have issued an NtH at all. Instead, they should have gone back to the lease company and requested the missing documents before proceeding. If ECP didn't do this and still issued the NtH, they have failed to comply with PoFA, meaning they cannot transfer liability to the hirer.

As for contacting the lease company to confirm whether they sent those documents to ECP, there's no need to risk interfering with the appeals process at this stage. Given that the burden of PoFA compliance is on ECP, the best course of action is to proceed with the appeal on the basis that ECP has failed to meet the necessary legal requirements. Let them prove otherwise—if they haven't followed PoFA properly, they can't enforce keeper liability. So yes, leaving it as it is and letting things take their course seems like the most strategic approach.

While the operator could theoretically try to go back to the lease company, it’s unlikely to be successful. Their failure to comply with PoFA at the time of issuing the NtH means they have no legal basis to hold the hirer liable. If ECP were to attempt to now chase the lease company, the lease company could simply say:

"You asked us for the hirer’s details, we gave them to you. If you failed to request the correct documents at the time, that’s your mistake, not ours."

There is a remote risk that if ECP were to go back to the lease company, even only to demand copies of the missing documents, the lease company will simply pay ECP and then charge the lessee, together with an admin fee for the PCN. Many lease companies have policies of paying private parking charges automatically and then passing the cost (plus an admin fee) onto the lessee, even when they are under no legal obligation to do so.

If your friend is really concerned about the very remote possibility of this, they could take proactive steps to preemptively warn the lease company not to pay the charge on their behalf. Your friend would have to email or write to the lease company and state something along the following lines:

Subject: Do Not Pay Parking Charge Notice – [PCN Reference]

Dear [Lease Company],

I understand that a private parking charge notice (PCN) has been issued against the vehicle I lease from you.

I wish to make it absolutely clear that I do not authorise you to pay this charge on my behalf. The charge is currently under appeal, and I do not consent to any payment being made to the parking company, as doing so would prejudice my ability to contest the matter.

If you pay this charge and attempt to recover the cost from me, I will dispute the payment and any associated administrative fees on the basis that no contractual obligation exists between us for you to settle speculative invoices on my behalf.

Please confirm in writing that you will not make any payment to the parking company in relation to this matter.

So...
The burden of PoFA compliance is on ECP, not the lease company.If ECP issued an NtH without first obtaining the required documents, they failed PoFA compliance, and the hirer cannot be held liable.If ECP obtained the documents but did not include them with the NtH, they have still failed PoFA compliance.If ECP realises their mistake, there is a very remote chance ECP may try to go back to the lease company, which could lead to an automatic payment—so your friend could preemptively tell the lease company not to pay.

garym71

Yes, I'm just going to let things play out without speculating and will just deal with things one stage at a time without doing anything stupid that might risk interfering or jeopardising the appeal process.

@LDast Thank you for the goldmine of information you provided in your previous post. That detailed explanation all makes things much clearer. I've dealt with a number of PCNs (and private clamping pre-2010) in the past for both myself and others, but it's been quite a while since the last one and this is the first time I've had to deal with one where a lease / hire vehicle was involved, so it's a new area for me.

garym71

So I'm back with an update. I guess it came as no real surprise that ECP rejected the appeal. For reference, below is the appeal letter text that was submitted along with redacted copies the rejection letter from ECP and the original Notice to Hirer that was sent prior to the appeal.

As a quick recap, ECP issued a NTH but failed to include "a copy of the hire agreement" and also "a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement" as required under PoFA 2012 Schedule 4 when sending out an NTH, so they failed to comply with PoFA legislation.

So it will now be onwards with a POPLA appeal. Is there any point trying to find other potential non-compliance issues with their NTK, or should lodging a POPLA appeal based purely on their non-compliance with paragraphs 13 and 14 of PoFA 2012 Schedule 4 be enough? I can't see anything obviously wrong with the NTK, but it's attached below for others to cast their expert eyes over and make comment on.

Appeal Letter Text

Dear Sir / Madam,

Parking Charge Notice: [PCN Number]

Vehicle Registration: [Registration]

I am writing to address the above Parking Charge Notice (PCN) that was issued to me by Euro Car Parks Ltd (ECP) as a Notice to Hirer. As the hirer of the vehicle, I am recognised as its keeper under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA). I am formally challenging the validity of this PCN.

As you are likely aware, Schedule 4 of POFA outlines strict requirements that must be met in order for a parking operator to hold the keeper liable for a Parking Charge. The Notice to Hirer issued by ECP did not comply with the POFA requirements. In order that you may understand why, I suggest that you carefully study the details of POFA Schedule 4, particularly those outlined in paragraphs 13 and 14.

Given that ECP has not met the POFA criteria for keeper liability, please confirm that you shall now cancel this charge. Should you choose to reject my challenge, please provide me with the details of the Independent Appeals Service (POPLA), including their contact information and a unique POPLA appeal reference so that I may escalate the matter to POPLA.

Thank you for your cooperation and I look forward to receiving your response within the relevant timescales specified under the British Parking Association Ltd Code of Practice.

Yours faithfully,

[Registered Hirer]

Appeal Rejection Letter

Notice To Hirer

Coupon-mad

garym71 said:

So I'm back with an update. I guess it came as no real surprise that ECP rejected the appeal. For reference, below is the appeal letter text that was submitted along with redacted copies the rejection letter from ECP and the original Notice to Hirer that was sent prior to the appeal.

As a quick recap, ECP issued a NTH but failed to include "a copy of the hire agreement" and also "a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement" as required under PoFA 2012 Schedule 4 when sending out an NTH, so they failed to comply with PoFA legislation.

So it will now be onwards with a POPLA appeal. Is there any point trying to find other potential non-compliance issues with their NTK, or should lodging a POPLA appeal based purely on their non-compliance with paragraphs 13 and 14 of PoFA 2012 Schedule 4 be enough? I can't see anything obviously wrong with the NTK, but it's attached below for others to cast their expert eyes over and make comment on.

Appeal Letter Text

Dear Sir / Madam,

Parking Charge Notice: [PCN Number]

Vehicle Registration: [Registration]

I am writing to address the above Parking Charge Notice (PCN) that was issued to me by Euro Car Parks Ltd (ECP) as a Notice to Hirer. As the hirer of the vehicle, I am recognised as its keeper under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA). I am formally challenging the validity of this PCN.

As you are likely aware, Schedule 4 of POFA outlines strict requirements that must be met in order for a parking operator to hold the keeper liable for a Parking Charge. The Notice to Hirer issued by ECP did not comply with the POFA requirements. In order that you may understand why, I suggest that you carefully study the details of POFA Schedule 4, particularly those outlined in paragraphs 13 and 14.

Given that ECP has not met the POFA criteria for keeper liability, please confirm that you shall now cancel this charge. Should you choose to reject my challenge, please provide me with the details of the Independent Appeals Service (POPLA), including their contact information and a unique POPLA appeal reference so that I may escalate the matter to POPLA.

Thank you for your cooperation and I look forward to receiving your response within the relevant timescales specified under the British Parking Association Ltd Code of Practice.

Yours faithfully,

[Registered Hirer]

Appeal Rejection Letter

Notice To Hirer

It's illegal to add an extra £2.50 (or any surcharge) for 'cheque handling'!

They are also lying near the top, about being able to hold the hirer liable under the POFA which they KNOW they can't. That's misleading,

They've not even responded to the fact they can't win because the NTH had no enclosures.

Easy win at POPLA then. Search the forum for:

example NTH POPLA appeal

garym71

Just a further quick question on this while I'm waiting for the paint to dry. The POPLA appeal was submitted on 7th April 2025 and POPLA immediately sent the below email reply confirming that the submission was successful.

What date is considered to be the out-of-time date for the operator to submit their own evidence? Is it 21 days from the date that POPLA confirm to be the successful appeal submission date (i.e. 7th April + 21 days = 28th April), or does the operator get given some additional grace period days (i.e. is their out-of-time date later than 28th April)?

Dear XXXXX,

Your appeal has been submitted successfully.

You can track the status of your appeal through the Track appeal page https://appealform.popla.co.uk/#/TrackAppeal/Index using your 10 digit verification code and the following password.

Password: XXXXX

We will now inform the Parking Operator of your appeal and allow them to upload any evidence they feel is necessary to the case, they will have a maximum of 21 days to complete this. Once they have completed this action you will be given an opportunity to comment on their evidence. We will contact you to let you know when this is available and with any further updates.

Yours sincerely

POPLA Team

Gr1pr

Certainly the first option,  but I suspect that leeway can be given,  so I would think that sometime next month,  but don't assume that deadlines are distinct never to be crossed deadlines.  You will or should hear back sometime in the next few weeks or months 

It may be important to you,  but its not to them 

garym71

So bang on the 21 day deadline that Euro Car Parks had to provide their own evidence to POPLA, today they lost the game of chicken by withdrawing from the appeals process. They provided no reasons as to why they withdrew. I guess they don't want to openly and publicly admit that they failed to follow POFA Schedule 4. So that's another victory chalked up against the PPC scammers without having given them a single penny

Thanks to all for the invaluable help and support provided in this thread.

For the benefit of others, I will post up a copy of the POPLA appeal letter that was submitted a bit later on.
EDIT: The appeal letter for this dispute has now been uploaded in the next post HERE.

Dear XXXXX,

The operator has contacted us and told us that they have withdrawn your appeal.

If you have already paid your parking charge, this is the reason your appeal will have been withdrawn. Unfortunately, you cannot pay your parking charge and appeal, which means that POPLA’s involvement in your appeal has ended. You will not be able to request a refund of the amount paid in order to resubmit your appeal to us.

If you have not paid your parking charge, the operator has reviewed your appeal and chosen to cancel the parking charge. As the operator has withdrawn your appeal, POPLA’s involvement has now ended and you do not need to take any further action.

Kind regards

POPLA Team