IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including QR codes, number plates and reference numbers.
Smart Parking ticket
Options
Comments
-
Hiya, I've just been reading through that very long Newbie post and I just keep reading about not saying that I was driving at first appeal when I already have? So guessing there is no way around this now?
I think it's hideous that they can get away with charging me for 11 mins overstay when I have a chronic illness, I paid for a ticket - I wasn't taking the mick. Really upset about it.
That means you can't use one of the appeal points, non-POFA compliant NTK.
You can still use ALL the others that are relevant.
It's post 3 of the NEWBIES that you need to concentrate on. Find the appeal points I mentioned, copy and paste then into a post here in this thread. (Open two windows. Copy from one and paste into the other.)
Grace periods (there are two) will be your first point.I married my cousin. I had to...I don't have a sister.
All my screwdrivers are cordless."You're Safety Is My Primary Concern Dear" - Laks0 -
Thanks, I've been reading through post three though and it keeps mentioning not admitting that I was driving though?? And I already have in first appeal? This is so confusing and I'm clearly too dumb for all this!!
0 -
Thanks, I've been reading through post three though and it keeps mentioning not admitting that I was driving though?? And I already have in first appeal? This is so confusing and I'm clearly too dumb for all this!!
When reading the NEWBIES, you need to filter out everything that is not relevant. Since you have given away the driver's identity, anything about not revealing it is irrelevant.
Likewise anything about byelaws, or hospitals, or IPC/IAS, or POFA is irrelevant. Concentrate ONLY on the things that ARE relevant. I gave you a list of those earlier, so that's your starting point.
This is only Smart Parking, and they are Not so Smart. You will win at PoPLA.I married my cousin. I had to...I don't have a sister.All my screwdrivers are cordless."You're Safety Is My Primary Concern Dear" - Laks0 -
Thanks, I've been reading through post three though and it keeps mentioning not admitting that I was driving though?? And I already have in first appeal? This is so confusing and I'm clearly too dumb for all this!!
That ship has sailed so forget it. Stop panicking. Read post 3 of the Newbies thread properly. Take your time.
Like I said just cut and paste a recent winning appeal if you get really stuck. You stand a good chance of winning.0 -
Thanks guys! I'm only panicking as I have little time so finding hard to concentrate - I work full time and have a 5y/o so it's tricky, will have another read through and see if it makes sense. It all sounds so scary though, the thought of going to court etc - so don't want to do the wrong thing.0
-
So, something like this:
POPLAVerificationCode: XXXXXXXVehicle Registration: XXXXXXXI, the registered keeper of this vehicle, received a letter dated 27/11/2017 acting as a notice to the registered keeper. My appeal to the Operator – Smart Parking –was submitted and acknowledged by the Operator on 08/12/2017 and rejected via an email dated 09/01/2018. I contend that I, as the keeper, am not liable for the alleged parking charge and wish to appeal against it on the following grounds:
1.Grace Period: BPA Code of Practice –non-compliance1
11.Grace Period: BPA Code of Practice –non-complianceThe BPA’s Code of Practice states (13) that there are two grace periods: one at the end (of a minimum of 10 minutes) and one at the start.BPA’s Code of Practice (13.1) states that:“Your approach to parking management must allow a driver who enters your car park but decides not to park, to leave the car park within a reasonable period without having their vehicle issued with a parking charge notice.”BPA’s Code of Practice (13.2) states that:“You should allow the driver a reasonable ‘grace period’ in which to decide if they are going to stay or go. If the driver is on your landwithout permission you should still allow them a grace period to read your signs and leave before you take enforcement action.”BPA’s Code of Practice (13.4) states that:“You should allow the driver a reasonable period to leave the private car park after the parking contract has ended, before you take enforcement action.If the location is one where parking is normally permitted, the Grace Period at the end of the parking period should be a minimum of 10 minutes.”BPA’s Code of Practice (18.5) states that:“If a driver is parking with your permission, they must have the chance to read the terms and conditions before they enter into the contract with you. If, having had that opportunity, they decide not to park but choose to leave the car park, you must provide them with a reasonable grace period to leave, as they will not be bound by your parking contract.”The BPA Code of Practice (13.4) clearly states that the Grace Period to leave the car parkshould be a minimum of 10 minutes. Whilst 13.4 does not apply in this case (it should be made clear -a contract was never entered in to), it is reasonable to suggest that the minimum of 10 minutes grace period stipulated in 13.4 is also a “reasonable grace period”to apply to 13.1 and 13.2 of the BPA’s Code of Practice. Kelvin Reynolds, Head of Public Affairs and Policy at the British Parking Association (BPA):
2“The BPA’s guidance specifically says that there must be sufficient time for the motorist to park their car, observe the signs, decide whether they want to comply with the operator’s conditions and either drive away or pay for a ticket.”“No time limit isspecified. This is because it might take one person five minutes, but another person 10 minutes depending on various factors, not limited to disability.”Recently (late November 2017) there was a not dissimilar POPLA Appeal (versus ParkingEye –Tower Road, Newquay) which was successful on the grounds that the assessor believed 11 minutes was a “reasonable grace period” and that “by seeking alternate parking arrangements, the appellant has demonstrated that he did not accept the conditions of the parking contract.” Needs the details from hereFinally, some 3 years ago years ago, on 30th July 2015, the minutes of the Professional Development & Standards Board meeting show that it was formally agreed by the Board (of BPA members and stakeholders) that the minimum grace period would be changed in 13.4 of the BPA Code of Practice to read 'a minimum of eleven minutes':“Implications of the 10 minute grace period were discussed and the Board agreedwith suggestion by AH that the clause should comply with DfT guidelines in theEnglish book of by-laws to encourage a single standard. Board agreed that asthe guidelines state that grace periods need to exceed 10 minutes clause 13.4should be amended to reflect a mandatory 11 minute grace period.”The recommendation reads:“Reword Clause 13.4 to ‘If the location is one where parking isnormally permitted, the Grace Period at the end of the parkingperiod should be a minimum of 11 minutes.”(Source:http://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/Meeting%20Notes/Governance/20150730_PDandS_Board_Action_Notes.pdf)This shows that the intention of stating vaguely: 'a minimum of ten minutes' in the current BPA CoP (not a maximum -a minimum requirement) means to any reasonable interpretation that seconds arede minimisand thereforenottaken
3into account –certainly an allegation of under eleven minutes (as is the case here) is perfectly reasonable.As stated earlier in this section, whilst 13.4 does not apply in this case (as a contract was never entered in to), it is not unreasonable to suggest that clarification of this time period in relation to 13.4 also goes some way to clarifying the terms “reasonable period”and “reasonablegrace period” stated in 13.1 and 13.2respectively of the BPA’s Code of Practice.If the BPA feel “a minimum of 11 minutes”is a reasonable time period to leave a car park after a period ofparking, it stands to reasonthat at leastthe same period of time is reasonable to also enter a car park, locate (and read) terms and conditions(in this case in the dark with no lighting), decide not to enter into a contract and then leave the car park.It is therefore argued that the duration of visit in question (which Euro Car Parks claim was 10 minutes 48 seconds) is not an unreasonable grace period, given:a)The site is not well lit and relies on nearby street lighting as its primary sourceof lighting.b)Visibility was hindered further as the site was in darkness at time of the visit –[ENTRY TIME]to [EXIT TIME](hh:mm;ss).c)The lack of sufficient signage throughout the car park in question(non-compliance with BPA Code of Practice 18.3)and the impact of that upon time taken to locate signage prior to entering into a contract.d)The failure to light signage adequatelyso as to make signsvisible from all parking spaces (which they are not, especially at night time) and legibleonce located.e)The lengthiness of Euro Car Parks’signage (in terms of word count)with asignificant amount of text included in an“Important Notice” section (the title “Important Notice” clearly implyingit is essential this must be carefully read and understood) in tiny red text at the bottom of the sign(see Figure 2). All factors discussed above serve merely to increase the time taken to:•Locate a sign containing the terms and conditions.•Read the fullterms and conditionsin the darkness.•Decipher the confusing information being presented(one example being identifying which fees apply, as discussed further in section 2, page??of this document).
4•Decide not to park and therefore enter into a contract.•Return to car and safely leave the car park.0 -
Sorry.....so, something like this even:
POPLA
VerificationCode: XXXXXXX
Vehicle Registration: XXXXXXX
I, the registered keeper of this vehicle, received a letter dated 27/11/2017 acting as a notice to the registered keeper. My appeal to the Operator !!!8211; Smart Parking !!!8211;was submitted and acknowledged by the Operator on 08/12/2017 and rejected via an email dated 09/01/2018. I contend that I, as the keeper, am not liable for the alleged parking charge and wish to appeal against it on the following grounds:
1.Grace Period: BPA Code of Practice !!!8211;non-compliance1
11.Grace Period: BPA Code of Practice !!!8211;non-complianceThe BPA!!!8217;s Code of Practice states (13) that there are two grace periods: one at the end (of a minimum of 10 minutes) and one at the start.BPA!!!8217;s Code of Practice (13.1) states that:!!!8220;Your approach to parking management must allow a driver who enters your car park but decides not to park, to leave the car park within a reasonable period without having their vehicle issued with a parking charge notice.!!!8221;BPA!!!8217;s Code of Practice (13.2) states that:!!!8220;You should allow the driver a reasonable !!!8216;grace period!!!8217; in which to decide if they are going to stay or go. If the driver is on your landwithout permission you should still allow them a grace period to read your signs and leave before you take enforcement action.!!!8221;BPA!!!8217;s Code of Practice (13.4) states that:!!!8220;You should allow the driver a reasonable period to leave the private car park after the parking contract has ended, before you take enforcement action.If the location is one where parking is normally permitted, the Grace Period at the end of the parking period should be a minimum of 10 minutes.!!!8221;BPA!!!8217;s Code of Practice (18.5) states that:!!!8220;If a driver is parking with your permission, they must have the chance to read the terms and conditions before they enter into the contract with you. If, having had that opportunity, they decide not to park but choose to leave the car park, you must provide them with a reasonable grace period to leave, as they will not be bound by your parking contract.!!!8221;The BPA Code of Practice (13.4) clearly states that the Grace Period to leave the car parkshould be a minimum of 10 minutes. Whilst 13.4 does not apply in this case (it should be made clear -a contract was never entered in to), it is reasonable to suggest that the minimum of 10 minutes grace period stipulated in 13.4 is also a !!!8220;reasonable grace period!!!8221;to apply to 13.1 and 13.2 of the BPA!!!8217;s Code of Practice. Kelvin Reynolds, Head of Public Affairs and Policy at the British Parking Association (BPA):
2!!!8220;The BPA!!!8217;s guidance specifically says that there must be sufficient time for the motorist to park their car, observe the signs, decide whether they want to comply with the operator!!!8217;s conditions and either drive away or pay for a ticket.!!!8221;!!!8220;No time limit isspecified. This is because it might take one person five minutes, but another person 10 minutes depending on various factors, not limited to disability.!!!8221;Recently (late November 2017) there was a not dissimilar POPLA Appeal (versus ParkingEye !!!8211;Tower Road, Newquay) which was successful on the grounds that the assessor believed 11 minutes was a !!!8220;reasonable grace period!!!8221; and that !!!8220;by seeking alternate parking arrangements, the appellant has demonstrated that he did not accept the conditions of the parking contract.!!!8221; Needs the details from hereFinally, some 3 years ago years ago, on 30th July 2015, the minutes of the Professional Development & Standards Board meeting show that it was formally agreed by the Board (of BPA members and stakeholders) that the minimum grace period would be changed in 13.4 of the BPA Code of Practice to read 'a minimum of eleven minutes':!!!8220;Implications of the 10 minute grace period were discussed and the Board agreedwith suggestion by AH that the clause should comply with DfT guidelines in theEnglish book of by-laws to encourage a single standard. Board agreed that asthe guidelines state that grace periods need to exceed 10 minutes clause 13.4should be amended to reflect a mandatory 11 minute grace period.!!!8221;The recommendation reads:!!!8220;Reword Clause 13.4 to !!!8216;If the location is one where parking isnormally permitted, the Grace Period at the end of the parkingperiod should be a minimum of 11 minutes.!!!8221;(Source:http://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/Meeting%20Notes/Governance/20150730_PDandS_Board_Action_Notes.pdf)This shows that the intention of stating vaguely: 'a minimum of ten minutes' in the current BPA CoP (not a maximum -a minimum requirement) means to any reasonable interpretation that seconds arede minimisand thereforenottaken
3into account !!!8211;certainly an allegation of under eleven minutes (as is the case here) is perfectly reasonable.As stated earlier in this section, whilst 13.4 does not apply in this case (as a contract was never entered in to), it is not unreasonable to suggest that clarification of this time period in relation to 13.4 also goes some way to clarifying the terms !!!8220;reasonable period!!!8221;and !!!8220;reasonablegrace period!!!8221; stated in 13.1 and 13.2respectively of the BPA!!!8217;s Code of Practice.If the BPA feel !!!8220;a minimum of 11 minutes!!!8221;is a reasonable time period to leave a car park after a period ofparking, it stands to reasonthat at leastthe same period of time is reasonable to also enter a car park, locate (and read) terms and conditions(in this case in the dark with no lighting), decide not to enter into a contract and then leave the car park.It is therefore argued that the duration of visit in question (which Euro Car Parks claim was 10 minutes 48 seconds) is not an unreasonable grace period, given:a)The site is not well lit and relies on nearby street lighting as its primary sourceof lighting.b)Visibility was hindered further as the site was in darkness at time of the visit !!!8211;[ENTRY TIME]to [EXIT TIME](hh:mm;ss).c)The lack of sufficient signage throughout the car park in question(non-compliance with BPA Code of Practice 18.3)and the impact of that upon time taken to locate signage prior to entering into a contract.d)The failure to light signage adequatelyso as to make signsvisible from all parking spaces (which they are not, especially at night time) and legibleonce located.e)The lengthiness of Euro Car Parks!!!8217;signage (in terms of word count)with asignificant amount of text included in an!!!8220;Important Notice!!!8221; section (the title !!!8220;Important Notice!!!8221; clearly implyingit is essential this must be carefully read and understood) in tiny red text at the bottom of the sign(see Figure 2). All factors discussed above serve merely to increase the time taken to:!!!8226;Locate a sign containing the terms and conditions.!!!8226;Read the fullterms and conditionsin the darkness.!!!8226;Decipher the confusing information being presented(one example being identifying which fees apply, as discussed further in section 2, page??of this document).
4!!!8226;Decide not to park and therefore enter into a contract.!!!8226;Return to car and safely leave the car park.0 -
admitting you are the driver is no biggie IF , and I mean , IF , the PPC has complied with POFA2012
and as a driver who only "overstayed" by 11 minutes you have the BPA CoP to protect you at POPLA, so if this was a 2018 pcn then download and read clause #13 of the BPA CoP where 2 eriods of 10 minutes are specified , one before the parking period and one after to leave the car park, making a minimum of 20 minutes gracve period in total (minimum)
so that is point #1 of a popla appeal (a classic BPA CoP failure)
also add the no landowner authority, poor and inadequate signage etc as extra points , making them either prove their case or tell popla they are withdrawing and throwing in the towel
read any recent 2018 popla appeal for smart, PE , Highview etc where these points are made and plagiarise one
as the driver has been admitted, do not bother yourself with POFA2012, whether you understand it or not , so its all the other points as mentioned above, but not the NTK or POFA2012 issues which MAY protect a keeper (but not a driver)
BTW , if you are copying and pasting them the forum is messing up the punctuation so you need to edit the above accordingly or its all gobbledegook
and if you are using an APPLE device, turn off smart punctuation for the same reason0 -
Is this better - hoping it makes sense:
POPLA Verification Code: XXXXXXX
Vehicle Registration: XXXXXXX
I, the registered keeper of this vehicle, received a letter dated 27/11/2017 acting as a
notice to the registered keeper. My appeal to the Operator !!!8211; Smart Parking !!!8211; was
submitted and acknowledged by the Operator on 08/12/2017 and rejected via an
email dated 09/01/2018. I contend that I, as the keeper, am not liable for the alleged
parking charge and wish to appeal against it on the following grounds:
1. Grace Period: BPA Code of Practice !!!8211; non-compliance 1
2. No Evidence of Landowner Authority - the operator is put to strict
proof of full compliance with the BPA Code of Practice
1. Grace Period: BPA Code of Practice !!!8211; non-compliance
The BPA!!!8217;s Code of Practice states (13) that there are two grace periods: one at
the end (of a minimum of 10 minutes) and one at the start.
BPA!!!8217;s Code of Practice (13.1) states that:
!!!8220;Your approach to parking management must allow a driver who enters
your car park but decides not to park, to leave the car park within a
reasonable period without having their vehicle issued with a parking
charge notice.!!!8221;
BPA!!!8217;s Code of Practice (13.2) states that:
!!!8220;You should allow the driver a reasonable !!!8216;grace period!!!8217; in which to decide
if they are going to stay or go. If the driver is on your land without
permission you should still allow them a grace period to read your signs
and leave before you take enforcement action.!!!8221;
BPA!!!8217;s Code of Practice (13.4) states that:
!!!8220;You should allow the driver a reasonable period to leave the private car
park after the parking contract has ended, before you take enforcement
action. If the location is one where parking is normally permitted, the
Grace Period at the end of the parking period should be a minimum of 10
minutes.!!!8221;
BPA!!!8217;s Code of Practice (18.5) states that:
!!!8220;If a driver is parking with your permission, they must have the chance to
read the terms and conditions before they enter into the contract with you.
If, having had that opportunity, they decide not to park but choose to leave
the car park, you must provide them with a reasonable grace period to
leave, as they will not be bound by your parking contract.!!!8221;
The BPA Code of Practice (13.4) clearly states that the Grace Period to leave the
car park should be a minimum of 10 minutes. Whilst 13.4 does not apply in this
case (it should be made clear - a contract was never entered in to), it is
reasonable to suggest that the minimum of 10 minutes grace period stipulated
in 13.4 is also a !!!8220;reasonable grace period!!!8221; to apply to 13.1 and 13.2 of the BPA!!!8217;s
Code of Practice.
Kelvin Reynolds, Head of Public Affairs and Policy at the British Parking
Association (BPA):
2
!!!8220;The BPA!!!8217;s guidance specifically says that there must be sufficient time for
the motorist to park their car, observe the signs, decide whether they want
to comply with the operator!!!8217;s conditions and either drive away or pay for a
ticket.!!!8221;
!!!8220;No time limit is specified. This is because it might take one person five
minutes, but another person 10 minutes depending on various factors, not
limited to disability.!!!8221;
Recently (late November 2017) there was a not dissimilar POPLA Appeal (versus
ParkingEye !!!8211; Tower Road, Newquay) which was successful on the grounds that
the assessor believed 11 minutes was a !!!8220;reasonable grace period!!!8221; and that !!!8220;by
seeking alternate parking arrangements, the appellant has demonstrated that he
did not accept the conditions of the parking contract.!!!8221;
Needs the details from here
Finally, some 3 years ago years ago, on 30th July 2015, the minutes of the
Professional Development & Standards Board meeting show that it was formally
agreed by the Board (of BPA members and stakeholders) that the minimum
grace period would be changed in 13.4 of the BPA Code of Practice to read 'a
minimum of eleven minutes':
!!!8220;Implications of the 10 minute grace period were discussed and the Board
agreed with suggestion by AH that the clause should comply with DfT
guidelines in the English book of by-laws to encourage a single standard.
Board agreed that as the guidelines state that grace periods need to exceed
10 minutes clause 13.4 should be amended to reflect a mandatory 11
minute grace period.!!!8221;
The recommendation reads:
!!!8220;Reword Clause 13.4 to !!!8216;If the location is one where parking is normally
permitted, the Grace Period at the end of the parking period should be a
minimum of 11 minutes.!!!8221;
(Source:
http://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/Meeting%20Notes/Governan
ce/20150730_PDandS_Board_Action_Notes.pdf)
This shows that the intention of stating vaguely: 'a minimum of ten minutes' in the
current BPA CoP (not a maximum - a minimum requirement) means to any
reasonable interpretation that seconds are de minimis and therefore not taken
3
into account !!!8211; certainly an allegation of under eleven minutes (as is the case
here) is perfectly reasonable.
As stated earlier in this section, whilst 13.4 does not apply in this case (as a
contract was never entered in to), it is not unreasonable to suggest that
clarification of this time period in relation to 13.4 also goes some way to clarifying
the terms !!!8220;reasonable period!!!8221; and !!!8220;reasonable grace period!!!8221; stated in 13.1 and
13.2 respectively of the BPA!!!8217;s Code of Practice.
If the BPA feel !!!8220;a minimum of 11 minutes!!!8221; is a reasonable time period to leave a
car park after a period of parking, it stands to reason that at least the same period
of time is reasonable to also enter a car park, locate (and read) terms and
conditions (in this case in the dark with no lighting), decide not to enter into a
contract and then leave the car park.
It is therefore argued that the duration of visit in question (which Euro Car Parks
claim was 10 minutes 48 seconds) is not an unreasonable grace period, given:
a) The site is not well lit and relies on nearby street lighting as its primary source
of lighting.
b) Visibility was hindered further as the site was in darkness at time of the visit !!!8211;
[ENTRY TIME] to [EXIT TIME] (hh:mm;ss).
c) The lack of sufficient signage throughout the car park in question (noncompliance
with BPA Code of Practice 18.3) and the impact of that upon time
taken to locate signage prior to entering into a contract.
d) The failure to light signage adequately so as to make signs visible from all
parking spaces (which they are not, especially at night time) and legible once
located.
e) The lengthiness of Euro Car Parks!!!8217; signage (in terms of word count) with a
significant amount of text included in an !!!8220;Important Notice!!!8221; section (the title
!!!8220;Important Notice!!!8221; clearly implying it is essential this must be carefully read
and understood) in tiny red text at the bottom of the sign (see Figure 2).
All factors discussed above serve merely to increase the time taken to:
!!!8226; Locate a sign containing the terms and conditions.
!!!8226; Read the full terms and conditions in the darkness.
!!!8226; Decipher the confusing information being presented (one example being
identifying which fees apply, as discussed further in section 2, page?? of this
document).
4
!!!8226; Decide not to park and therefore enter into a contract.
!!!8226; Return to car and safely leave the car park.
2. No Evidence of Landowner Authority - the operator is put to strict proof of
full compliance with the BPA Code of Practice
As this operator does not have proprietary interest in the land then I require that
they produce an unredacted copy of the contract with the landowner. The
contract and any 'site agreement' or 'User Manual' setting out details including
exemptions - such as any 'genuine customer' or 'genuine resident' exemptions or
any site occupier's 'right of veto' charge cancellation rights - is key evidence to
define what this operator is authorised to do and any circumstances where the
landowner/firms on site in fact have a right to cancellation of a charge. It cannot
be assumed, just because an agent is contracted to merely put some signs up
and issue Parking Charge Notices, that the agent is also authorised to make
contracts with all or any category of visiting drivers and/or to enforce the charge
in court in their own name (legal action regarding land use disputes generally
being a matter for a landowner only).
Witness statements are not sound evidence of the above, often being pre-signed,
generic documents not even identifying the case in hand or even the site rules. A
witness statement might in some cases be accepted by POPLA but in this case I
suggest it is unlikely to sufficiently evidence the definition of the services provided
by each party to the agreement.
Nor would it define vital information such as charging days/times, any exemption
clauses, grace periods (which I believe may be longer than the bare minimum
times set out in the BPA Code of Practice) and basic information such as the land
boundary and bays where enforcement applies/does not apply. Not forgetting
evidence of the various restrictions which the landowner has authorised can give
rise to a charge and of course, how much the landowner authorises this agent to
charge (which cannot be assumed to be the sum in small print on a sign because
template private parking terms and sums have been known not to match the
actual landowner agreement).
Paragraph 7 of the BPA Code of Practice defines the mandatory requirements
and I put this operator to strict proof of full compliance:
7.2 If the operator wishes to take legal action on any outstanding parking
charges, they must ensure that they have the written authority of the
landowner (or their appointed agent) prior to legal action being taken.
7.3 The written authorisation must also set out:
a. the definition of the land on which you may operate, so that the
boundaries of the land can be clearly defined
b. any conditions or restrictions on parking control and enforcement
operations, including any restrictions on hours of operation
c. any conditions or restrictions on the types of vehicles that may, or
may not, be subject to parking control and enforcement
d. who has the responsibility for putting up and maintaining signs
e. the definition of the services provided by each party to the agreement0 -
it still needs editing to make sense, too many punctuation errors caused by the forum issues detailed elsewhere and not fixed by the MSE staff0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards