"Initial Parking". POPLA Advice please - appealing as keeper. (I was not driving).

skuther

Hi all. I received this notice to keeper on 20th August regarding alleged event on 6th August.

I am the keeper. I was not driving. I have never been to the car park in question and have no idea what their T&Cs are or there signage may or may not look like.

I have not declared the driver. I sent the standard MSE newbies thread "appeal" - only alteration was I started with "I acknowledge receipt of your Notice to Keeper, delivered to me on 20 August 2026." (?just outside of the 14day POFA window?).

skuther

Obviously got the standard rejection:

"Thank you for your appeal received on 22/08/2026 regarding the above detailed Parking Charge Notice. We have carefully reviewed the case and considered the points that you raised in conjunction with the facts and evidence available to me. On this occasion, your appeal has been rejected and we are satisfied that this Parking Charge Notice was issued correctly. Sea Hotel Car Park is private land and is subject to a parking management scheme put in place by the operator at the landowner’s request. There are specific terms and conditions in place as part of this scheme. These terms and conditions are stated on the signs installed at the site, which are displayed in clear and prominent positions. The terms and conditions of the scheme at this location state that a valid payment must be made for the length of time the vehicle is parked on site. On 06/08/2026, the vehicle was parked without this payment being made. This was a breach of these terms and conditions.
Please be advised, in the event you overstay the initial period of parking time purchased, additional time can be purchased at any point prior to your vehicle exiting the car park. Additional time can be purchased via the payment machines(s) or if offered at the location in question, the pay by mobile service.

We can see that you paid for 3 hours parking time but stayed an additional 14 minutes and 25 seconds without payment. Therefore, the charge remains valid and payment is due.

Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the motorist to ensure that they seek out, read and comply with the terms and conditions of parking that are in place. By parking on site in breach of these terms andconditions, it has been agreed that the charge detailed on the signs will be paid. I appreciate that this may not be the desired outcome, however, you have now reached the end of our internal appeal process."

(then standard payment blurb and POPLA code).

skuther

Hi all,

Looking for advice on POPLA appeal please.

Summary is:

• Initial Parking Ltd, Sea Hotel Car Park, Seaham.
• ANPR capture only.
• Alleged event 06/08/2026.
• NTK allegedly issued 11/08/2026 - but actually received 20/08/2026 (can verified by another person also).
• I am the registered keeper.
• I was not the driver and have never identified the driver.
• I have never visited the site myself and have never seen the signage or terms and conditions.

In my appeal I pointed out that the NTK was vague and requested details of the allegation, signage and evidence. Initial Parking have not provided copies of the signage in their rejection.

The NTK only contained two ANPR images showing entry and exit, not evidence of any actual parking period. The date/time information is shown as text on the document rather than as a timestamp on the photographs themselves.

The online portal described the contravention as "Unpaid Tariff Time", but the NTK itself did not clearly explain the allegation.

In the rejection letter Initial Parking have now confirmed:

"We can see that you paid for 3 hours parking time but stayed an additional 14 minutes and 25 seconds without payment."

Therefore:

• They now admit payment was made for 3 hours (so not a "no payment made" case).
• The entire allegation is based on ANPR entry at 14:26:59 and exit at 17:41:24, a difference of 3h14m25s.

What I have identified so far:

• They have not provided the payment machine records, payment timestamp, VRN entered or expiry calculations despite me requesting evidence.
• They have not explained how consideration/grace periods were applied.

The current Private Parking Sector Single Code of Practice appears to require a minimum 5 minute consideration period and 10 minute grace period for pay-up-front tariff parking.

They have simply stated that the vehicle was on site for 3h14m25s and that 3 hours was paid for, without showing the timing of the paid session.

I advised them in my first appeal that the NTK was delivered to me on 20/08/2026 - they failed to acknowledge (or disagree) with this in their rejection.

Potential POPLA grounds I am considering:

• Keeper appeal, driver not identified.
• Strict proof of POFA compliance
• Failure to provide evidence of payment records/payment timestamp.
• Failure to demonstrate correct application of consideration and grace periods.
• Reliance solely on ANPR entry/exit times.
• No evidence provided of the signage requested.
• Landowner authority.

Am I on the right lines, and which of these would regulars consider strongest for POPLA?

Thanks.

kryten3000

POPLA will not accept that the delivery of the notice was late.

Use the CMA open letter to the government to point out their concerns around treating "time on site" as the "period of parking".

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6a5765a62cbe5d1c179a652d/A_letter_sent_by_the_CMA_to_the_Ministry_of_Housing__Communities_and_Local_Government.pdf

Coupon-mad

@skuther you've googled it and now read the CMA's Open Letter to the parking industry, yes?

Found what they say about consideration and grace periods?

yarpsnehpets

Evidence of the exact time you paid might help you given the small amount of the overstay.

SacredStephan

Was the driver a customer of the Sea Hotel?

Car1980

You seem to be under the impression you'll win at Popla. You have no chance I'm afraid.

It's become and more corrupt over time and as of 2026 even slam dunks are routinely found against. Popla will be going next year and so they and the BPA appear to have decided they will follow the IAS's system of finding against the motorist 95% of the time.

The only use Popla now has is to dig out landowner documents and signage. So by all means use it to gather information, but I wouldn't bother with any genuine appealing.