Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

    • P3dr0
    • By P3dr0 18th Jul 18, 6:02 PM
    • 6Posts
    • 0Thanks
    McDonalds Car Park Gatwick: Parking Charge for not Validating a Ticket
    • #1
    • 18th Jul 18, 6:02 PM
    McDonalds Car Park Gatwick: Parking Charge for not Validating a Ticket 18th Jul 18 at 6:02 PM
    We received on the 17/07/2018 a Notice to Registered Keeper from MET Parking Services with date of the alleged contravention 30 May 2018 stating: "the vehicle with reg no. XXXXX was observed parked in an apparent breach of the terms and conditions that are displayed on signs in prominent places around the parking area and that those motorists entering the site agree to be bound by. As a result, this parking charge notice, which is now immediately payable, has been issued. The reason for issuing the charge notice is: Failure to Validate stay in car park"

    We went to McDonalds on the 30/05/2018, the 03/07/2018 and the 06/07/2018 and in all 3 occasions parked the car, ate inside and left the restaurant in less than 50 minutes (60 minutes free allowance). We have the credit card statements records showing we were genuine customers, but not the actual receipts or car park tickets.

    We did not validate the car park tickets as we were not aware of this requirement at the time. We have not received any notices for the alleged "breaches" that we could have incurred during our visits on the 03/07/2018 and 06/07/2018 to date, but we fear we will.

    We visited yesterday 17/07/2018 the restaurant and contacted the manager but he asked us to contact MET directly as there was nothing they could do. During this visit we tested the system and found that there are two big red signs displayed at this car park, but these can be seen from every space in the car park from the driver's seat can't be necessarily read.

    One of these signs is directly opposite to the barrier and clearly seen in the photographic evidence printed in the NRK. However, a driver leaving the car park will be focusing his/her attention on the barrier's direction and the car in front and not on the sign by the fence. During the alleged offences there was a small queue leaving the car park and some drivers experienced problems with the system and had troubles opening the barrier.

    The natural and sometimes almost instinctive reaction of many drivers when an automatic barrier does not open when the ticket is presented is to press the button and ask for assistance. MET has taken this action as a consent to pay a disproportionate car park charge for 60 minutes free parking.

    To make matters worse, the barrier' screen is not readable during a bright day as the screen is too dark (all visits took place during bright sunny spells) and any text or messages presented on screen were not be visible under these conditions.

    Today, we were on-foot and pressed the button at the exit barrier and the barrier lifted. The text on the screen could not be read as it was sunny, approximately at the same time as the previous visits. Surely can't be considered as an agreement to pay car park charges and illustrates how the system is setup to levy charges against ticket validation instead of misuse/abuse of the facilities.

    No member of staff inside the caf! offered us to validate the car park ticket or had any signs related to the car park validation requirements.

    We would like to start the appeal procedure available at MET website, but not quite sure if we should "bundle" our three visits together or one at the time. We understand that after three visits not seeing the red big signs maybe difficult to believe but, we genuinely did not see any until these were pointed out by the restaurant manager, which illustrates how poor the signage positioning and prominence is in real life terms and how little attention we give to signposts constantly bombarding our senses.

    We were thinking to adapting the NEWBIES reques of appeal and include all three visits, even though only the notice for the 30/05/2018 has been received. We would really appreciate any advice provided on this matter and going forward with the POPLA.

    Many thanks in advanced.
    Last edited by P3dr0; 17-08-2018 at 11:10 PM. Reason: reading improvements
Page 2
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 18th Aug 18, 12:54 AM
    • 8,677 Posts
    • 8,589 Thanks
    I am the appellant throughout (as I am entitled to be)...
    Of course you are... you are the one appealing.

    That should be:
    I am the keeper throughout (as I am entitled to be)...

    Surely 'first person' is ok for a PoPLA appeal, isn't it Waamo?
    • waamo
    • By waamo 18th Aug 18, 9:54 AM
    • 3,900 Posts
    • 5,089 Thanks
    Possibly but I wouldn't trust the assessors not to fall into the trap of admitting being the driver, especially if the ppc point it out in their reply to the appeal.
    This space for hire.
    • P3dr0
    • By P3dr0 18th Aug 18, 11:45 AM
    • 6 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Thank you both for the inputs, appreciated. I will read again and see it could be emphasised the fact that I will be appealing as the keeper a bit more and then...
    Ready to be submitted? am I missing something important?

    Comments and suggestions are always welcome.


    • waamo
    • By waamo 18th Aug 18, 12:04 PM
    • 3,900 Posts
    • 5,089 Thanks
    Other than that it looks fine to me.
    This space for hire.
    • P3dr0
    • By P3dr0 18th Aug 18, 1:41 PM
    • 6 Posts
    • 0 Thanks

    That all I need to send the appeal letter and start my holidays..!!!

    Thanks again!

    • Fruitcake
    • By Fruitcake 18th Aug 18, 1:54 PM
    • 37,208 Posts
    • 83,934 Thanks
    You need to check and amend the non POFA part of your appeal. If there was a windscreen ticket then the POFA timescales are day 28 to 56 for the NTK to arrive, the date of the alleged event being day zero.

    If ANPR is used, then the NTK must arrive by day 14, the date of the alleged event being day zero.

    You said it didn't arrive by day 28, which isn't part of the POFA requirements. It's by day 14 or between day 28 and 56. You need to point out to the assessor which part it has failed.
    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" - Laks
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

2,641Posts Today

7,712Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • Ta ta... for now. This August, as I try and do every few yrs, I'm lucky enough to be taking a sabbatical. No work,?

  • RT @lethalbrignull: @MartinSLewis I've been sitting here for a good while trying to decide my answer to this, feeling grateful for living i?

  • Early days but currently it's exactly 50 50 in liberality v democracy, with younger people more liberal, older more?

  • Follow Martin