will do

yes thanks, do feel more confident. Also really appreciate your support @ericsbrother @lookingforinfo @honeybee @brassnecked @dx100uk your support has made me have a look at myself and will be more supportive of others myself in future too - Thanks once again

Thanks to all the team on this site - I successfully won my appeal , I received the message below from POPLA. Thankyou ALL "Thank you for submitting your parking charge Appeal to POPLA. An Appeal has been opened with the reference xxxxxx Parking Eye Ltd have told us they do not wish to contest the Appeal. This means that your Appeal is successful and you do not need to pay the parking charge. Yours sincerely POPLA Team"

Thanks for the tip off. However I am still grateful for your support regardless of the appeal outcome I have made to POPLA - which was not straight forward as the online appeal form does appear to have been designed in a way to discourage people to make an appeal - so I do question POPLA's impartiality

@ ericsbrother I will take the above points on board and will include in my appeal along with the relevant signage photos with the claim - will keep you updated on the outcome. massive thanks to all the team for your help, wishing you and all your families the best - you have been great. Thanks

Thanks once again. - also can you please look at the queries below. • just to confirm there is no point in disputing that according my clock I left the car park before 6pm, and to insinuate their clock must be wrong? • Furthermore, I have just noticed Parking Eye has incorrectly recorded on the driver’s online statement posted on their website that I had paid parking charges for 4hrs 40 minutes (see Appx 1), This is incorrect, as the parking charges sign in the car park state that cost of parking between 8am – 6pm on a Saturday is £4.50 which is what I paid. According to the ANPR I entered the car park at 1pm and 26 seconds, therefore the £4.50 would cover parking for 5hrs , is there any value in stating this?

@ lookingforinfo and ericsbrother, Thanks! I have edited the appeal letter further to your feedback. I just have a couple of more queries? • just to confirm there is no point in disputing that according my clock I left the car park before 6pm, and to insinuate their clock must be wrong? • Furthermore, I have just noticed Parking Eye has incorrectly recorded on the driver’s online statement posted on their website that I had paid parking charges for 4hrs 40 minutes (see Appx 1), This is incorrect, as the parking charges sign in the car park state that cost of parking between 8am – 6pm on a Saturday is £4.50 which is what I paid. According to the ANPR I entered the car park at 1pm and 26 seconds, therefore the £4.50 would cover parking for 5hrs , is there any value in stating this? Dear POPLA adjudicator, I’m writing to you to appeal the charge under POPLA Ref: xxxxxx, issued by Parking Eye for the following reasons: - 1. I paid £4.50 for parking on Saturday 26th August which covered parking charges costs on the day. I paid the prescribed fee to park the vehicle until 6pm on the day. As parking costs on a Saturday from 8am-6pm is £4.50 (see Appx 1). 2. Furthermore, Parking Eye have no evidence that the time the vehicle was PARKED was beyond the time paid for. As PE's camera system only, records entry and exit there is no true record of how long the vehicle was actually parked and it is denied that the actual time parked was longer than the paid for period. Any stay is measured by the entry and exit cameras and the time taken to manoeuvre the car to exit the car park is not part of the parking period so cannot be included in the time allowed, agreed and paid for. Therefore, I could not have been parked for 5hrs as I had to first of all find a place to park, shop, go and pay for my ticket then drive from the parking spot to the exit. 3. In addition, the allegation made by Parking Eye is in breach of their BPA Guidelines, clause 13.4 laid out by the BPA Code of Practice. 13.4 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 As this parking charge was issued in breach of The BPA guidelines PE had no legitimate reason to ask the DVLA for my details there should have been no need for this to ever have come before POPLA. Thus the charge should be cancelled. Yours faithfully Appendix 1.pdf

@ericsbrother Thanks, hope the draft below is good to send? Dear POPLA adjudicator, I’m writing to you to appeal the charge under POPLA Ref: xxxxxxx issued by Parking Eye for the following reasons: - 1. Parking Eye allege that the vehicle (xxxxxx) was at the giveway leaving the car park at 6pm and 52 seconds. According to mine and the passengers clock we left the car park before 6pm. I paid £4.50 for parking on Saturday 26th August which covered parking charges costs on the day (see Appx 1 and 2). I paid the prescribed fee to park the vehicle until 6pm on the day, but I was actually parked up until before 6pm 2. Furthermore, Parking Eye have no evidence that the time the vehicle was PARKED was beyond the time paid for. As PE's camera system only, records entry and exit there is no true record of how long the vehicle was actually parked and it is denied that the actual time parked was longer than the paid for period. Any stay is measured by the entry and exit cameras and the time taken to manoeuvre the car to exit the car park is not part of the parking period so cannot be included in the time allowed, agreed and paid for. 3. In addition, the allegation made by Parking Eye is in breach of their BPA Guidelines, clause 13.4 laid out by the BPA Code of Practice. 13.4 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 The above reasons make it very evident that Parking Eye have imposed parking charges which are clearly unjustified. Yours faithfully

Thanks all for your advice, I Have edited the original letter and removed majority of the text and added the text from Erircsbrothers post above. Can you please confirm the latest version below is OK? Dear POPLA adjudicator, ["]I’m writing to you to express my concern over the unfair PCN sent to the keeper of the car, number plate: XXXX XXX. There are many points where Parking Eye has not observed the Code of Practice as laid out by the BPA, June 2015 version 6. Therefore, I am challenging this Parking Charge Notice. The most important reasons being: 1. Parking Eye’s allegation that the driver was at the giveway leaving the car park at 6pm and 52 seconds. According to the driver’s and the passengers clock they left the car park before 6pm. The driver paid £4.50 for parking on Saturday 26th August which covered parking charges costs on the day. (see Appx 1 and 2) There was no overstay in the car park as the time paid for is the time you are allowed to PARK. 2. Furthermore Parking Eye have no evidence that the time the vehicle was PARKED was beyond the time paid for. Any stay is measured by the entry and exit cameras and the time taken to manoeuvre the car to exit the car park is not part of the parking period so cannot be included in the time allowed, agreed and paid for Therefore, there was no overstay in the car park as the time paid for is the time allowed to park. The above reasons make it very evident that Parking Eye have imposed parking charges on the driver which are clearly unjustified. Yours faithfully Also to confirm should I not include reference to clause 13.4 BPA Code of Practice sorry guys, can you please confirm whether I should submit this appeal letter or the one above? Please feel free to edit accordingly, Thanks Dear POPLA adjudicator, I’m writing to you to express my concern over the unfair PCN sent to the keeper of the car, number plate: XXXX XXX. There are many points where Parking Eye has not observed the Code of Practice as laid out by the BPA, June 2015 version 6. Therefore, I am challenging this Parking Charge Notice. The most important reasons being: 1. Parking Eye’s allegation that the driver was at the giveway leaving the car park at 6pm and 52 seconds. According to the driver’s and the passengers clock they left the car park before 6pm. The driver paid £4.50 for parking on Saturday 26th August which covered parking charges costs on the day. (see Appx 1 and 2) There was no overstay in the car park as the time paid for is the time you are allowed to PARK. 2. Furthermore Parking Eye have no evidence that the time the vehicle was PARKED was beyond the time paid for. Any stay is measured by the entry and exit cameras and the time taken to manoeuvre the car to exit the car park is not part of the parking period so cannot be included in the time allowed, agreed and paid for Therefore, there was no overstay in the car park as the time paid for is the time allowed to park. 3. In addition the allegation made by Parking Eye is in breach of their BPA Guidelines, clause 13.4 laid out by the BPA Code of Practice. 13.4 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 The above reasons make it very evident that Parking Eye have imposed parking charges on the driver which are clearly unjustified. Yours faithfully

@ericsbrother just to confirm should I send the MP letter I attached with my appeal and as I have already declared to Parking Eye I was the driver , then in my appeal via POPLA so I now state the same?

Thanks all for your support and feedback to date – as without this I would have given up on appealing and just paid the charges imposed. I have drafted my appeal to POPLA , see below – feedback appreciated please. In addition can I please get advise on the following 2 queries: 1. In my original appeal to Parking Eye I did disclose I was the driver , but in my appeal to POPLA I was going to state “the driver of the vehicle..” does this matter? 2. I received a supporting letter from my local MP, see attached (I have blacked out my personal details) – should I send this MP letter with my POPLA appeal? Thanks in advance. Please see draft appeal to POPLA below. Dear POPLA adjudicator, I’m writing to you to express my concern over the unfair PCN sent to the keeper of the car, number plate: XXXX XXX. There are many points where Parking Eye has not observed the Code of Practice as laid out by the BPA, June 2015 version 6. There are several key reasons for why I am challenging this Parking Charge Notice. The most important reasons being: 1. The driver of the vehicle disputes Parking Eye’s allegation that they were at the giveaway leaving the car park at 6pm and 52 seconds. According to the driver and the passengers clock they left the car park before 6pm. The driver paid £4.50 for parking on Saturday 26th August which covered parking charges costs on the day (see attached “Appx 1 - “Parking charge notice screenshot” and “parking charge notice signage”). 2. Parking Eye allege that the driver was at the giveway leaving the car park at 6pm and 52 seconds and therefore alleging the driver had overstayed by 52 seconds. Despite this allegation Parking Eye are in breach of their BPA Guidelines, clause 13.4 laid out by the BPA Code of Practice. 13.4 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. Therefore, Parking eye has not observed the grace period outlined in 13.4 of the BPA Code of Practice 3, Parking Eye allege that the driver was at the giveaway leaving the car park at 6pm and 52 seconds and therefore alleging the driver had overstayed by 52 seconds. Parking Eye’s camera takes images of cars leaving and entering the car park. There is no evidence/allegation provided by Parking Eye that the car was still parked in the car park after 6pm. 4. Parking Eye are in breach of their BPA guidelines, which they are supposed to abide by in order to request information from DVLA. Clause 12.3 of the BPA code of Practice states the following: 12.3 You must use data from the DVLA only to carry out the parking control and enforcement activity for which you requested the data. You must not act as an agent to get data from the DVLA on behalf of a third party (for example a landowner or agent), unless that third party becomes a member of the AOS and meets all the compliance conditions. If you do not keep to the Code requirement this could lead to your membership of the AOS and of the BPA being suspended or terminated. As requesting personal data from the DVLA for an alleged over stay of 52 seconds in the car park is not “reasonable cause” Appendix 1.pdf letter from mp evidence scan.pdf

BTW - please find below latest response I received from the DVLA to my email below: My email: " Thanks for your email. I am very surprised you deem an alleged overstay of 52 seconds in the car park as ‘reasonable cause’ to release my personal data. Can I please ask whether the DVLA have processes in place to audit the personal data requests made by Parking Eye? If so when was this last done and how many requests for data were looked at?" DVLA response: ".... As mentioned by my colleague , DVLA cannot regulate how private parking companies manage the sites they are authorised to operate on. If you believe that the parking charge was issued unfairly, there is a route available to the motorist to appeal the charge. With regards to your query relating to the auditing process employed by DVLA, the Agency carries out audits on ParkingEye Ltd and their data requests at least once a year. Within this audit, a sample of enquiries is taken and evidence is requested to support these enquiries. The last audit was conducted in May 2017 and consisted of a sample of 150 enquiries. ParkingEye Ltd achieved a high level of compliance as a result of this audit....."

thank you all for your advise. I will try and put together the proposed appeal at the weekend, so will appreciate for your support /feedback before I submit. Thanks

@ ericsbrother thanks for your reply. the fact that their allegation is that I left the car park 52 seconds after 6pm -as already pointed out to me in earlier posts, this is in breach of BPA guidelines “13.4 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” Therefore do you think POPLA would accept my appeal just based on this? Thanks

Thanks - I have cropped the relevant small print on the signage - see attached. Parking Eye signage - small print.pdf