POPLA rejected my appeal - what can I do?

LSCM2025

Hi, I am hoping someone may have some useful advice for me here, please.

I went to Milton Country Park and paid for a parking ticket. The machine is one where you type in your number plate, and upon doing this, after typing in the first half of my plate, the machine jumped to the next stage, and I couldn't go back, so I paid for the parking ticket. 

I received a PCN from ParkingEye, and I appealed it, explaining I have proof of purchase (including a photo of my ticket) and explaining the issue with the machine. ParkingEye rejected this, so I further appealed to POPLA. I explained the issue with the machine and that I have a ticket as proof of purchase. The time and date on the ticket correspond to the PCN, and CCTV will show that my car was the only car in the car park with those letters/numbers as the first half of the number plate. This was at 6.15 pm, so there were only 2 other cars in the car park.

Anyway, POPLA rejected this appeal, stating that as I didn't type in the full plate in the machine, I did not comply with the terms and conditions of the car park. They also said ParkingEye provided evidence of other successful plate entries.

Now I have received a £100 final notice. This is infuriating, as I paid for the car parking and have the ticket to prove it!

Can anyone advise if I can do anything else regarding this matter? Or should I accept that I have to pay it?

Thank you in advance.

Coupon-mad

Answered regularly. POPLA is unimportant:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6630477/howard-centre-wgc/p4

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81603231/#Comment_81603231

Obviously you are in ignore mode unless a claim form arrives. I say 'obviously' ignore because this is fully covered by the official MSE Guide linked at the top of the page & checked by Martin Lewis this summer.

LSCM2025

Thanks for your response. I have read a lot about these in previous years, and I have ignored previous fines that have been passed to different debt collectors. I have, in the past, received charges almost 5 years after the initial one was issued.

ParkingEye always quote the dismissal of the appeal Parkingeye V Beavis [2015] UKSC 67. Now I know this is to scare people, but I feel they are more likely to take me to court if I just ignore them.  If I go to court, I can prove that I paid, but ParkingEye have records to show many correctly inputted plates, so I am now sure how likely it would be that I would win if it were to go to court.

Coupon-mad

But ParkingEye use DCB Legal who always discontinue. No hearings. No risk.

James_Poisson

LSCM2025 said:

........... I feel they are more likely to take me to court if I just ignore them.  If I go to court, I can prove that I paid, but ParkingEye have records to show many correctly inputted plates, so I am now sure how likely it would be that I would win if it were to go to court.

So what exactly do you expect to do other than ignore, or pay a greedy scamming company that wanted this to happen as it's the only way they get any money out of victims.

The whole industry is based on scamming, the appeals system is a sham, it isn't in any way independent, when POPLA is appointed by the BPA, and paid by the PPC.

This is about a commercial contract you entered into to pay the landowner for using the offered service of a parking place. The fact that his appointed free supplier of hardware and technology to charge for that and monitor it has faulty or glitch systems in place (they cynical might say o purpose) is not your fault.

The tariff was displayed, you paid the correct charge, you have the evidence but the technology failed, what more could you do.

Well the best adjudicator is a judge in spite of their scare tactics.

the_worm_that_turned

Coupon-mad said:

Answered regularly. POPLA is unimportant:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6630477/howard-centre-wgc/p4

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81603231/#Comment_81603231

Obviously you are in ignore mode unless a claim form arrives. I say 'obviously' ignore because this is fully covered by the official MSE Guide linked at the top of the page & checked by Martin Lewis this summer.

Obviously ignore, or, you could charge them for your time in responding, if you can be bothered. I did, as I was not the driver in my case and did not receive a compliant notice to keeper.

My case is different to yours, in so far as no binding contract existed between me and the parking management company. I took them to court and they failed to file a defence, they now owe me over £3,300 as per the sealed CCJ from last week for my time as per a fee schedule and damages for harassment and data handling/processing breaches.

In your case, as @Coupon-mad says you could just ignore them and await a claim form from the court (if it arrives). Or you could consider billing them for your time.

Many will say that it is a unilateral contract, they are just doing their job in chasing an alleged debt, etc. However, the contract you had with them is argued to be fulfilled (i.e. you go on their land to have the pleasure of parking (consideration on their part) at a cost to you (consideration on your part), you accept this offer (meeting of minds), you pay (as you can prove) and therefore the contract is fulfilled). The fact they argue that the contract is not fulfilled is up to them and by the sounds of things, they won't take it to court (I could be wrong). As for you charging for your time via a Fee Schedule, that is a completely separate matter.

They want something from you (information, your time and effort, your data) you want to charge for that. You make the offer to provide the former in line with a fee (e.g. £100 per letter, £50 per email) and if they continue to request information from you when you have explained your position regarding the original (now fulfilled contract) then you will only do so in line with your Fee Schedule.

Again, many will deny this has standing in law. I always did it as a back up to Counter-claim any claim from the parking company. But in the end it turned it round and took them on and won.

Something to consider, feel free to DM me.

None of the above is legal advice, I am not legally qualifed, I am just The Worm That Turned

patient_dream

                   Parking Eye and DCBL
                       The Hapless Duo?

AND POPLA ..... what can we say, also a HAPLESS set up. a BPA talent spotting  sham who are on the side of the parking scam, especially Parking Eye

               AND PARKING EYE ....
DCBL will have added a FAKE £70 to line their own pockets. Has Parking Eye so soon forgotten their own case in the Supreme Court where it was said that the ticket amount was set to operate the scheme
IE: NO FAKE ADD-ONS.


Court Judges are fully aware of the Supreme Court ruling and they DO NOT like being misled by a legal who is involved in the money scam

A very good reason for DCBL to discontinue

WAKE UP PARKING EYE, the Cowboy stigma is still with you