Eternity Fire PCN - Newbies Template and POPLA One Liner has failed

Nijinsky

I parked in Oystermouth car park, Swansea and received a PCN by Eternity Fire. I have never parked in this car park before. The car park was full and I didn't see any signs. On reflection, I should have gone around the car park to check signs and see if there was a pay and display machine.

Anyway, I used the usual newbies first time appeal template which has never let me down before, but this time, Eternity rejected my appeal and sent me a POPLA code. I followed the advise to select "Other" and then typed "This operator has no contract at this site to issue PCNs", which I thought would make Eternity withdraw the charge, but Eternity have responded with the following:

"Signage of notification of change was implemented on site on the 20th of June 2024. Photos of all signs that were posted were taken. 11 permanent signs were placed in the car park detailing the terms and conditions of using the car park for users. ANPR taking note of entry and exit times was started on the 5th of July. All signs have been BPA and Site management approved. Signs are compliant with BPA guidance."

There is no evidence of any contract and the 11 signs are all in tiny font. I have 7 days to appeal. How should I proceed next? Eternity have submitted their BPA "Certificate of Membership", but they need to provide evidence they have a contract with the landowner to issue the PCNs don't they?

Shall I once again type the "This operator has no contract at this site to issue PCNs" line to POPLA, or shall I do a more thorough appeal stating the signs aren't prominent, clear or legible from all parking spaces, like in this thread? Eternity Fire & Security Parc Tawe Retail Park — MoneySavingExpert Forum

Coupon-mad

Eternity have submitted their BPA "Certificate of Membership", but they need to provide evidence they have a contract with the landowner to issue the PCNs don't they?

Yep so just say that, as your comments.

Nijinsky

Coupon-mad said:

Eternity have submitted their BPA "Certificate of Membership", but they need to provide evidence they have a contract with the landowner to issue the PCNs don't they?

Yep so just say that, as your comments.

Thanks, so I will post something like:

"I previously stated this operator has no contract at this site to issue PCNs. Eternity have responded with evidence of their BPA "Certificate of Membership", but they also need to provide evidence they have a contract with the landowner to legally issue the PCNs. Eternity's response fails to prove this."

Does this seem alright?

Appreciate your time and help as always.

Coupon-mad

Yep.         

Nijinsky

My appeal was unsuccessful. POPLA's Robert Andrews has merely assumed Eternity Fire have an agreed contract with the landowner, although they still haven't provided any evidence of a contract. Surely POPLA can't give decisions based on assumptions without evidence? Anyway, I can no longer challenge POPLA's decision and if I wish to appeal further, I've been given the option of going through the Citizen's Advice Bureau or seek independent legal advice.

Here is the full assessment from POPLA's Robert Andrews. Please advise what I do next?


Operator Name: Eternity Fire & Security

Decision

Unsuccessful

Assessor Name

Robert Andrews


Assessor summary of operator case:

The operator has issued the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) due to parked in a car park without clearly displaying a valid pay & display ticket or voucher or parking clock.

Assessor summary of your case:

The appellant has raised the following points from their grounds of appeal:

• The parking operator has not contract to issue PCNs at this site. After reviewing the parking operator’s evidence, the appellant expands their grounds of appeal in relation to: 

• The parking operator has provided a Certificate of Membership for the British Parking Association (BPA) but they also need to provide evidence of the contract they have with the landowner. The above evidence will be considered in making my determination.

Assessor supporting rational for decision:

When 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.

The appellant has explained that the parking operator does not have a contract to issue PCNs and they need to provide evidence of the contract they have with the landowner.

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, whilst I acknowledge that the contract the parking operator has with the landowner has not been provided, the parking operator has confirmed that they do work on behalf of the landowner.

Furthermore, if there is no authority for the parking operator to work here, it is likely that the landowner would remove the signage at the same time. Not many landowners would look on quietly while someone operates on their land without their permission.

If the appellant would like to take this further, they could raise it directly with the parking operator and I am satisfied that their authority has been evidenced.

The signage explains that this is a pay and display car park and that a £100 PCN would be issued for any breach of the terms. On this occasion, the parking operator has evidenced that the appellant was parked here without a valid pay and display on display and as such, they have parked in breach of the terms.

This has resulted in the issuance of the PCN. After considering the evidence from both parties, the appellant parked in a car park without clearly displaying a valid pay & display ticket or voucher or parking clock and therefore did not comply with the terms and conditions of the site.

As such, I am satisfied the parking charge has been issued correctly and I must refuse the appeal.

ChirpyChicken

So you just ignore any debt recovery letters
Its no issue
Shows no consistency because many assessors would find for the motorist 

Nijinsky

ChirpyChicken said:

So you just ignore any debt recovery letters
Its no issue
Shows no consistency because many assessors would find for the motorist 

That's what I'm thinking. Worse case scenario, they keep chasing, I keep ignoring, then they try taking me to court and I follow Coupon Mad's defence template here to win?
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6108153/template-defence-to-adapt-for-all-parking-cases-with-added-admin-dra-costs-edited-in-2025

ChirpyChicken

Correct! Simple as that 

Nijinsky

ChirpyChicken said:

Correct! Simple as that 

Great, thanks for your time and help as always. I will not worry any further and continue ignoring until they either give up, or send me court papers. I will only worry about that if it happens.

Nellymoser

@Nijinsky could you copy/post your POPLA decision with some paragraphs breaks (see how last one was posted) in the POPLA Decisions Announcement thread. 

Shocking POPLA can make assumptions on behalf of PPCs but won't do this for appellants.

kryten3000

Do make a complaint to POPLA, they won't change their decision but it is worthwhile highlighting the inconsistencies.

It is also useful at the court stage to show that POPLA is not to be trusted as a legitimate alternate dispute resolution service.