Parking fine help needed

[riverm]

I drove to home bargains and found it not open. There were a few other cars parked outside and another car drove into the car park after me, so I waited in case it was about to open. Then checked the times on my phone and left. I’ve received a parking charge for using the car park for 7 minutes. I did appeal. I was honest and explained what happened, this was rejected. Apparently I can appeal once more through a different channel but will have to pay the full £100 if they don’t agree. Is there anything I can say to help my case? I didn’t notice the sign facing out onto the street, no exactly easy to see and read before you go in. The terms and conditions are on the signs inside the car park but the one facing the street does say not to use when the shop isn’t open but the store open hours are inside the car park so you have to go in to see them. Do they have to allow a certain amount of time to read the signs? I was there 7 minutes.

Parking Eye are members of the British Parking Association (“BPA”) and they should follow the BPA code of practice. It should also be followed by POPLA if you appeal to them. So that’s where you need to look for bases to appeal.

https://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/AOS/Sector%20Code%20Templates/sectorsingleCodeofPracticeVersion1.1130426-2.pdf

The COP does allow for a “consideration period” - a period to allow you to read signs etc and decide if you want to accept the parking terms and park. Annex B sets out the minimum which looks to be 5 minutes in your case. You were there 7 minutes so just over. Unfortunately, if you admitted that you were waiting to see if the shop opened rather than just taking the time to read the signs, you have probably undermined any argument you should be considered as within that consideration period and since you were over the minimum 5 minutes you might have had difficulty arguing that you needed that long to consider the signs regardless.

There are obviously lots of bases to challenge a private parking ticket eg around signage etc or the way you were ticketed / contents of the notice but no more from what you have said that I could suggest drawing on in a further appeal.

The guy who runs this FB page can generally get you off the fine for £15 ish

CHALLENGE YOUR PRIVATE PARKING TICKET

The 'consideration period' (often 5 minutes) is the time they give you to read their terms after entry.

If you exceed that window, even by just a few minutes, they consider you to have accepted the terms and used their services.

You aren't disputing having outstayed the consideration period, and you've already admitted to using it for something other than what's permitted.

You don't need to read the terms before entering, and you don't need to enter the car park to know the store opening times (you got them off your phone).

Based purely on the information you've given, there's nothing to appeal.

Yeah, you admitted sitting for 7 mins waiting for it to open. Which means you've used the carpark.

As others say, you could've looked at opening times before using carpark. I think you'll just have to accept it.

It's not like it's going to make you want to shop there again but they don't care I guess as they get paid for having this parking company police their land.

Tell them you want to appeal to Popla and ask them for a reference number. This appeal costs you nothing and them about £25 per case.

When you ask them for the appeal reference number also tell them that you will still not pay even if Popla refuse your appeal. Make it very clear to the parking company that you will only pay their invoice if they get a court judgement in their favour.

They will more than likely cancel the ticket because they only go after the low hanging fruit of people that they can scare into paying. It's unlikely they will pay £25 to pursue a weak case where the driver is not intending to pay. Parking companies only usually take people to court in absolute slam dunk obvious wins or repeat offenders.

Staying in a carpark for 7 minutes waiting for a shop to open is not unreasonable and most importantly their client (ie Home bargains) has not suffered any financial loss due to your mistake.

This advice is from my own previous experiences and not intended as any sound legal advice.

Yes OP giving this guy a try might beyour best bet.

However please can people stop calling this a fine. It isn’t. It is merely an invoice and has a very different legal standing to a fine (only government bodies can issue fines.)

Also remember these parking invoices are issued by AI. Appeals are also dealt with by AI, and it’s very much a computer says no situation.

It’s only when you appeal to POPLA, or they are considering taking you to court to recover the money, that a human being actually looks at it and common sense can be applied.

Make it very clear to the parking company that you will only pay their invoice if they get a court judgement in their favour.

Parking companies take around 400,000 to 500,000 cases to court every year. For large operators, issuing court proceedings is often automated and routine rather than exceptional. I wouldn't rely on the operator dropping the case just because you insist you will only pay if it goes to court. The likely outcome is that it will go to court and you will end up owing them a lot more than the original charge.

Have you actually thought about what you have written?

Sending out a bulk print run of letters threatening to take somebody to court is not the same as taking them to court.

The chance of the parking company taking to OP to court due to this given infringement is about zero.

If they do not cancel the invoice following the request of a POPLA reference number accompanied by a well written email I will be surprised.

Don't embarrass yourself. That user is a regular here and a solicitor.

And yes, from personal experience they do take people to court in huge numbers. The bulk run of threats is no different to the bulk run of MCOL applications.

Source for 400-500k please....

This figure was given in written evidence to a parliamentary committee. The person giving that evidence got the figure from a member of the Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities Parking (Code of Practice) Steering Group. I am not certain where the member of the steering group got their figure but, as she is a civil servant, I would assume she has access to relevant information that gives a solid basis for that estimate.

Looking at information that is publicly available, in 2012 there were around 550,000 money claims made per year and the number was falling. Only a handful of claims came from parking companies. Once the law was changed to allow parking companies to enforce their fines against the registered owners of cars, the number of claims started to balloon. It is possible the massive increase in claims was unrelated to that change in the law, but I cannot see anything else that happened around that time that would have led to such an increase. Last year there were over 1,900,000 money claims. The estimate of 400,000 to 500,000 being by or on behalf of parking companies looks conservative to me.

To deal with this as well, of course I have thought about what I have written.

Parking companies issued 14.4 million parking tickets in the year ending March 2025. So no, I am not talking about letters threatening to take someone to court. I am talking about claims actually filed through the courts. There are around half a dozen firms of solicitors that specialise in bulk litigation for the parking companies and do very well out of this.

And I am confident you will be surprised at the outcome if OP follows your advice. The parking company in this case appears to be on very solid ground. OP stayed in the car park for more than the consideration period at a time when parking was banned, as is clearly stated on the notice shown in the photo.

Also, the company involved here is Parkingeye, the company that took a case all the way to the Supreme Court to establish that private parking companies are entitled to sue the registered owner of any car that does not comply with the restrictions. They are known to be one of the most litigious of all parking companies with a very high success rate.

On the information OP has posted, I would expect the case to end up in court if she does not pay. If it does end up in court, I would expect her to lose and have to pay Parkingeye's court fees and interest as well as the original charge (but not the ridiculous admin charges they often try to add to their claim).

What makes you think that the parking company is on solid ground?

There is a 5 minute consideration period that exists for reading signage in both Public and Private Carparks.. The OP was in the car park for 7 minutes. A grand total of 2 minutes over this and it can be reasonably stated she was waiting for the shop to open.

As I say - A well written email asking for the Popla reference and the invoice will most likely get cancelled. The parking company are not going to waste £25 on this one.

The fact it was only 2 minutes over is irrelevant. It was over. Another way of looking at it is that she stayed 40% longer than the consideration period. But the point is that the consideration period is 5 minutes. Not "5 minutes but it is ok if you stay a little bit longer than that". Her reason for exceeding the consideration period is irrelevant.

A well written email asking for the POPLA reference will result in OP getting the POPLA reference. Parkingeye know they will win at POPLA and will also win if this goes to court.

Stop embarrassing yourself. Seriously.

The idea that parking companies cannot enforce their fines and don’t take people to court has long been over, the law changed a long time ago. They do take people to court. They do win. And it is a very very easy process so there is literally nothing stopping them, and they do it.

It does not matter if it is 2 minutes, or 2 hours. Once you’re over, you’re over and you will lose.

Of course it matters.

The whole point of the court process is that both parties make their cases and the judge presides over the evidence and makes an on balance decision. A two day overstay will likely result in the judge upholding the invoice whereas a two minute overstay with a legitimate reason will not.

There is little point engaging with you further given that you are unable to entertain any degree of critical thinking - so I will leave it there.

I do wonder which parking company you work for though 😉

There is no legitimate reason. Even women who have pulled in to breastfeed and overstayed have lost at court. It really is that black and white.

You’re just embarrassed that you argued with a really well known solicitor on mumsnet who knows what she is talking about, and asked her to cite her source for the figures thinking you could catch her out but all you did was make yourself look like an idiot. Now you’re embarrassed so you’re pulling the “I’m not going to continue the discussion” line because… you can’t, since you’re so very very wrong and too embarrassed to hold your hands up and say so.

Completely wrong.

A two minute overstay will result in the judge upholding the invoice regardless of whether the driver has a legitimate reason. Following the decision of the Supreme Court in ParkingEye Ltd vs Beavis, the courts will enforce the parking company's terms and conditions unless the driver can argue that the signage was unclear, the payment machines were faulty or there were mitigating circumstances such as breaking down. The Supreme Court decided that this is about breach of contract. This decision is binding on the lower courts so, unless the terms of the contract are unreasonable (e.g. the charge for overstaying is excessive - note that up to £100 is regarded as reasonable), the courts will enforce the terms of the contract. They will not substitute some other set of terms that they make up on the spot.

The contract gives you a consideration period of 5 minutes. If you stay longer than that, you have to pay. That is the contract the courts will enforce.

Note that I do not work for a parking company, nor have I ever worked for a parking company, either directly or indirectly. I do, however, understand how the courts view these cases.

You had it right in your first post, your comments are indeed not “any sound legal advice”. Luckily there are lawyers giving accurate information based on actual knowledge and experience.

Stop embarrassing yourself. By callling it a fine you are showing your lack of understanding. In legal terms it’s an invoice.. Only government bodies can issue fines.

The law did not change. It’s just that the parking companies have become more litigious in taking people to court.

pop it in Gemini and they will give you a letter and appeal

internal appeals are rarely found in favour of the person they are trying to fine!

so go to the second appeal knowing the first appeal always fails

use all the reasons so gives you but the one it will win on is the grace period as you were only there 7 minutes and the grace period is more than that legally

Sorry got grace period and consideration period muddled - ignore me

if the signage is unclear then try that

The law changed in 2012. Before that, you could ignore it and refuse to tell them who was actually driving, which made it very difficult for them to enforce the contract if they couldn’t prove who the driver was. In 2012, the law changed to hold the vehicles registered keeper liable, meaning they could enforce the contract through court against the registered keeper without needing any proof of who was driving. And they do. By the thousands.

The grace period is 5 minutes.