Excel Appeal Rejected

imgoneagainpromise

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82082107#Comment_82082107

I appealed the PCN on the basis that my partner, who was driving the vehicle at the time, accidentally entered the Vehicle Registration Mark (“VRM”) for her vehicle, instead of my vehicle.
This appeal included the VRM which was accidentally entered, as well as a photograph of the parking ticket obtained showing that parking was paid for [Appendix 1].

Annex F of the Single Sector Code of Practice (“CoP”) [Appendix 2] sets out the circumstances where the charge should be reduced to £20, and this includes:
a) where the driver has paid the tariff but made a major keying error when registering their vehicle for example … motorist entered the wrong car registration (e.g. their previous car or another vehicle from their household).

In its response the Operator has sought to impose an additional requirement that I prove ownership of the vehicle whose VRM was entered. No such requirement appears in the CoP. The Operator already holds the payment data matched against a VRM that its own ANPR images confirm was not present on site, while my vehicle was. The payment can therefore be readily matched to the vehicle that was actually parked. Requiring proof of ownership of an irrelevant third-party vehicle is unnecessary and would involve the processing of personal data of a person who is not being held liable, contrary to the data-protection principles in the UK GDPR and Data Protection Act 2018.

In contravention of the CoP, the Operator did not offer me a reduced charge of £20.
The failure to do so means that this PCN should be cancelled in its entirety.

Additionally, on 16th July 2026, the Competition and Markets Authority (“CMA”) published an open letter to private parking operators [Appendix 3].
Paragraph 30 highlights failures of operators to “reduce PCNs to £20 in line with the Charter”.
At paragraph 31, the CMA concludes that such failures “could infringe consumer law, in particular by falling below the standard of care and skill expected of operators, as these are likely to impact consumers’ decision making”.

The Operator’s refusal to apply the mandatory reduction, and its invention of an evidential hurdle not found in the CoP, is precisely the type of conduct identified by the CMA.

I therefore request that the Independent Appeals Service allow this appeal and direct the Operator to cancel Parking Charge Notice XXXXXXXXX

I reserve the right to refer the Operator’s conduct (and, if necessary, the handling of this appeal) to the Competition and Markets Authority.

Thoughts on this ? Used the above message as a template and just mashed some words in.

Coupon-mad

Looks great! Keep pushing back.