Evidence photos only show registration number for 15 seconds.

scamdodger

Here's the signage from EPS evidence photos. Other signs are on posts next to the marked parking bays.

James_Poisson

There is no context to that photo, where is it positioned you cannot tell, but it confirms the standard understanding of DYL's, it says from what I can read no parking on DYL's which you didn't, however that image is too blurred.

scamdodger

Clearer daylight photo of one of the signs

scamdodger

Interesting parallel here, although not relevant to this case.

Coupon-mad

Can't read the article but would like to. Please can you screenshot it?

scamdodger

https://www.lep.co.uk/business/vinted-users-fined-ps70-for-using-inpost-parcel-lockers-at-aldi-stores-9159214

Does this work?

Nellymoser

I posted it on Parking stories in news/media thread

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82146471#Comment_82146471

scamdodger

Update;

Following the appeal EPS have responded today to say it was unsuccessful. Disappointing but not entirely surprising I suppose!

Their rejection was questionable, as they stated that their Ts&Cs specifically prohibit stopping in a restricted area, whereas the signs clearly state 'No parking on or over double yellow lines'.

They say that the purpose of the stop, including loading and unloading activity, does not override the specific restriction applicable to that location. But the Ts&Cs only restrict parking and is silent about L & U!

I will post the relevant text of the appeal and the rejection in full on the next pages.

I'm also asking the person I'm helping to take some more photos of the signage to see if it is prominent on the part of road the vehicle stopped.

But I suppose the golden question; is this the last throw of the dice by EPS before they give up?

I don’t think we will be taking up the offer of IAS appeal.

Have a look at the next couple of posts.

Do forum members think there is a good case?

scamdodger

The appeal;

I dispute your 'parking charge', as the keeper of the vehicle. I deny any liability or contractual agreement.  There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn.

LOADING and UNLOADING was taking place which is evident (tailgate open, people movement, etc) from some of your images.  The conditions on the notice board (image 12) state NO PARKING on the double yellow lines.

There are eleven images taken between 20:46:53 and 20:55:57.  But only four actually show the vehicle registration number plate, timed between 20:49:45 and 20:49:57.  Therefore the vehicle can only be identified on images 4 to 7;  a time period of just 12 seconds.

You must provide evidence of the grace period agreed with the landowner (commonly 5 minutes) to read the parking terms and conditions.  Euro Parking Services is put to strict proof that the vehicle in question was PRESENT and PARKED at that location in excess of this time.

I also refer you to the case of Johnson vs Homeguard.

scamdodger

The rejection (with my comments appended)

Site: Speed Way

Issue date: 28/08/2026

Contravention Date : 24/08/2026

Thank you for your recent correspondence regarding the above Parking Charge Notice (PCN).

After reviewing the details of your appeal and the evidence held on file, we must advise that your appeal has been unsuccessful. We note your comments regarding the vehicle registration images, the alleged [obvious] loading and unloading activity, and your reference to the consideration period. We also note that you have not identified the driver.

However, the contravention relates to the vehicle being stopped in a restricted area of the car park, including the double yellow lines/crosshatched area. The site terms and conditions prohibit stopping or parking in these restricted areas, and the restriction applies to the location where the vehicle was recorded. [No! The site terms and conditions only prohibit parking (not stopping).]

We have noted your statement that loading and unloading was taking place. However, the information and evidence provided do not establish that the vehicle was authorised to stop in the restricted area.

The purpose of the stop, including any loading or unloading activity, does not override the specific restriction applicable to that location.[No! There is no specific restriction applicable.]

We have also considered your comments regarding the period between the images showing the vehicle’s registration. The time between these images does not determine the total Only for 12 seconds duration of the vehicle’s presence at the site[No definitive proof from the images it was present for more than 12 seconds] .

The available ANPR and photographic evidence records the vehicle at the relevant location, and the contravention concerns stopping [Nothing in the terms and conditions about stopping or loading/unloading– it says PARKING.] in a restricted area rather than simply the length of time the vehicle remained there. (So are they suggesting there is no consideration period at all??)

We have also noted your reference to Johnson v Homeguard. The circumstances and findings of that case do not establish an exemption from the specific parking restrictions applicable at this site.

It remains the motorist’s responsibility to check and comply with the site terms and conditions and to ensure that the vehicle is stopped [NO NO NO!] or parked only where permitted.

Unfortunately, based on the information and evidence currently available, we are unable to cancel the PCN on this occasion. The appeal is consequently unsuccessful, and the PCN remains valid and payable.

The terms and conditions of use of the car park are clearly stated on the signs prominently displayed around the car park, these include vehicles are not permitted to park on restricted areas of the car park such as double yellow/red lines [Loading/unloading on double yellow lines is NOT parking. If this was restricted, there should be appropriate kerb markings and statements to that effect in the Terms and Conditions.], crosshatched bays, no parking zones. According to our records your vehicle was incorrectly parked [It wasn’t parked for goodness sake!!] , we have no option but to reject this appeal.

Please note that the terms and conditions of parking are displayed at multiple locations around the site.[Yes, but are the signs visible from the position of the vehicle? TBC when I get more images.] It is the responsibility of all motorists to read and comply with the information provided. Our car parks are audited by the International Parking Community (IPC) to ensure compliance with signage standards, including requirements for signs to be clearly visible, legible, and prominently displayed.

Details of how to submit an appeal can be found at:

www.theias.org

As the discounted settlement period has lapsed, you are now required to pay £100.

We are satisfied that the Parking Charge Notice was issued correctly and that sufficient attention was brought to the driver with regards to the terms and conditions enforced. In light of the aforementioned, your appeal is declined.

If you wish to appeal this decision further, you may refer your case to the Independent Appeals Service (IAS), which is operated by the International Parking Community (IPC). [A total waste of time as the IPC are funded by the Parking Companies and are widely regarded as a ‘kangaroo court’. So, do not bother.]

Please note that the IAS will only consider appeals submitted within 28 days from the date of this correspondence and once this process concludes, the matter will be closed and any decision reached will be binding.

Yours sincerely,

Appeals Team