POPLA Appeal - Park Avenue Southall

aconfusedcat

I see the below mentioned in the code but it doesn't apply in my scenario as I can park greater than 20 minutes such as an hour or all day (8am-11pm).

"NOTE 2: The grace period does not apply to short stay areas – controlled land where the parking of a vehicle is permissible for a limited period not greater than 30 minutes, for example at airport and railway station drop off and pick up zones." 

Coupon-mad

Ok so I think you can say this P&D site fits in the third row of the consideration/grace period table in the Joint Code, therefore a consideration period of 5 mins applies plus an end grace period of a minimum ten minutes.

As such, there was no breach and the appeal made it very clear that the driver was at all times engaged in trying to pay in those early minutes once parked, but the queue and the poorly-functioning system caused a slight delay, not any conduct of the driver. Either way, the consideration and grace period allowances were not exceeded.

aconfusedcat

Coupon-mad said:

Ok so I think you can say this P&D site fits in the third row of the consideration/grace period table in the Joint Code, therefore a consideration period of 5 mins applies plus an end grace period of a minimum ten minutes.

As such, there was no breach and the appeal made it very clear that the driver was at all times engaged in trying to pay in those early minutes once parked, but the queue and the poorly-functioning system caused a slight delay, not any conduct of the driver. Either way, the consideration and grace period allowances were not exceeded.

Oh that's sweet, I thought the 5 minute consideration period only applied if you did not park else you just had the 10 minute grace period? If it does that's brilliant! I will better reword my comment tomorrow so I would be grateful if you could review when you're free. Thank you for your help. 

Coupon-mad

"I thought the 5 minute consideration period only applied if you did not park else you just had the 10 minute grace period?"

Well, as part of the Code Steering Group, I helped write/suggest those Consideration & Grace period tables for the 2022 Government Code (withdrawn after a legal challenge).

It was NEVER intended that there is to be no consideration period for people who decide to park and stay and this will also not be the case when the Labour Government reintroduce the Code in a few months.

I know there are over 30 cynical changes in the Joint Code because I counted and listed them for the Government in 2024, so they wouldn't be taken in by thinking the Joint Code was essentially one and the same as the withdrawn, fair Code that the Tories had worked on. The differences were all utter scammery but I lose track now of what they were.

Now, if the Joint Code has got it stated somewhere that a consideration period "doesn't apply when drivers stay" who actually cares? That's clearly abject scammery - would never get past a Judge - and it really doesn't matter if you lose at POPLA because you won't be paying.

aconfusedcat

Coupon-mad said:

"I thought the 5 minute consideration period only applied if you did not park else you just had the 10 minute grace period?"

Well, as part of the Code Steering Group, I helped write/suggest those Consideration & Grace period tables for the 2022 Government Code (withdrawn after a legal challenge).

It was NEVER intended that there is to be no consideration period for people who decide to park and stay and this will also not be the case when the Labour Government reintroduce the Code in a few months.

I know there are over 30 cynical changes in the Joint Code because I counted and listed them for the Government in 2024, so they wouldn't be taken in by thinking the Joint Code was essentially one and the same as the withdrawn, fair Code that the Tories had worked on. The differences were all utter scammery but I lose track now of what they were.

Now, if the Joint Code has got it stated somewhere that a consideration period "doesn't apply when drivers stay" who actually cares? That's clearly abject scammery - would never get past a Judge - and it really doesn't matter if you lose at POPLA because you won't be paying.

Thanks, I'm a bit confused because in the Code it states a minimum of 5 minutes for consideration period and 10 minutes for the grace period. I have seen in other comments that others refer it as minimum of 10 minutes - are they including the consideration period? It doesn't state in the Code that the consideration period doesn't apply if you park but points out that for the consideration period

"This is not relevant where there is evidence that a consideration period has ended other than entry and exit onto land. The minimum consideration period occurs when a parking operator assumes after a set period of time that the consideration period has ended." 

Since payment was made 7 minutes they must apply the minimum 5 minutes since they are relying on ANPR entry and exit times and my ticket shows 18:22.

I have made a slight change to my POPLA comment to emphasise not exceeding the consideration or grace period as you said so would appreciate if you could review it.

This appeal should be allowed because ParkingEye’s own evidence confirms that no breach occurred.

1. ParkingEye’s Evidence Confirms Payment Was Made

ParkingEye’s evidence includes a payment record showing that 20 minutes of parking was paid for, beginning at 18:22 and ending at 18:42 on 22/08/2025.

This proves the driver complied with the contract and intended to pay for the stay. There is no dispute about non-payment.

2. Alleged Overstay – Only 3 Minutes

ParkingEye’s ANPR data records a total stay of 33 minutes. This equates to an alleged “overstay” of just 3 minutes beyond the paid duration.

Such a minor difference cannot reasonably give rise to a £100 charge. It is both legally trivial (de minimis) and entirely covered by the BPA Code’s grace period requirements.

3. BPA Code of Practice – Grace Period Requirements

The BPA Code of Practice is binding on all Accredited Operators. Section 5.1, 5.2  and Annex B require that for this type of car park:

• A minimum 5-minute consideration period upon entry to allow drivers to find a bay, unload passengers, and pay.
• A minimum 10-minute grace period after a paid period expires before enforcement action.

In this case:

• The driver paid for parking from 18:22 to 18:42.
• The vehicle exited at 18:48:36.
• The alleged 3 minute overstay is well within the minimum 10-minute mandatory grace period.
  

Furthermore, the driver was at all times engaged in trying to pay in those early minutes once parked, but the queue and the poorly-functioning system caused a slight delay.

Therefore, ParkingEye’s own evidence confirms that no breach occurred.

4. Consideration Period on Arrival

The Code also requires a reasonable period upon entry. At this site, the driver had to:

• manoeuvre through a tight and narrow car park, locate and park safely at a bay (approx. 1 1/2 minutes),
• wait for a driver to finish using the machine (approx. 2 minutes), 
• wait for a beggar begging for cash to move away from the machine (approx. 2  minutes).
• needed to type the registration number correctly and find the correct change (approx 2 minutes). 

This 7-minute process is exactly the type of consideration period recognised in the BPA Code. ParkingEye’s reliance on ANPR entry/exit times, without acknowledging this, is not compliant.

5. Proportionality and Consumer Rights

Even if POPLA were to accept ParkingEye’s claim of a 211-second overstay, enforcing a £100 charge for such a trivial matter is disproportionate and contrary to the fairness requirements of the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

The Supreme Court decision in ParkingEye v Beavis (2015) is not relevant here. In Beavis, the Court upheld charges for significant overstays in a free car park with commercial justification. A 211-second stay beyond a paid session, where payment was made in full, is clearly not analogous.

6. Photo Evidence is Outdated and Misleading

ParkingEye has provided images of the car park dated April 2024. These do not accurately reflect how the parking would appear under normal conditions in person at the time of the alleged parking event in August 2025. Since the parking event occured during the evening, poor lighting as seen in the ANPR entrance footage indicates that the headlights wouldn't have clearly shown the entrance signage. There is no light on the pole so reading the sign would be more difficult during the parking event since it was dark.

Moreover, the images fail to demonstrate the tight corners and narrow and difficult layout to manoeuvre in the car park, which directly affects the time it takes a driver to locate a space and park carefully. This context is crucial to understanding the consideration period required by the BPA Code. By relying on old, selective photographs, ParkingEye’s evidence does not give a true or fair representation of the site.

7. Conclusion

ParkingEye’s evidence confirms that:

• The driver paid for 20 minutes of parking.
• The stay exceeded the paid period by only 211 seconds.
• This is fully covered by the BPA’s mandatory 10-minute minimum grace period.
  

The PCN has been issued contrary to the BPA Code of Practice and is unenforceable since the consideration and grace periods were not exceeded.

I respectfully request that POPLA allow this appeal and direct ParkingEye to cancel the charge.

Coupon-mad

Looks ok. Worth a shot but POPLA isn't good.