Thanks @FTMDave - I will not respond to them any further.

Nexus have responded further to me after I sent an email to them:

Thanks for your help on this @lookinforinfo I didn't actually overstay, I paid within the one hour time and left within the grace period, the exit time shows the time I left, which was after the one hour I had paid for. I will sit tight but I really want to know why this is seen as a "major" keying error, is it possible to request a SAR (subject access request) and ask what car my actually paid the parking for?

Payment proof below. It cleared my bank account on the Monday 19/12/22 (parking was on Saturday 17/12/22). They've taken my money but the following questions need answering from Group Nexus: I have used their payment machine to pay - the transaction should show which car this payment was registered against? Why are they raising this PCN when a payment was made for the correct duration and exited within the grace period? They cannot argue that I have tried to drive off without paying payment001.pdf

Thank you @Nicky Boy for all your responses so far, very helpful. The bottom line is I paid for the parking. I paid for 1 hour parking which was 80p, I then left within the grace period. I am reading the other threads mentioned above. In the meantime, is there anything else I need to do? Write a letter to them or anything else?

I've now uploaded the PCN. I think I have mentioned somewhere I was the driver. I didn't feel I had to hide this when genuinely I've paid and got proof of payment.

Here is the original penalty charge / invoice. Then reduced to £20. Now as I've lost my POP:A appeal, the charge is £100 to pay. pcn001.pdf

What will happen if I decide not to pay the £100. I just need to understand what I should prepare for? I'm guessing they will pass the charge on to the debt collectors? How much including court fees, can the charge go upto *if" I were to lose (can't see how)?

I'm pretty sure I typed my registration correctly and chose my car. The keying error is what the operator are now implying.

1 Date of the infringement 17/12/2022 2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 28/12/2022 [scan up BOTH SIDES as ONE PDF- follow the upload guide] please LEAVE IN LOCATION AND ALL DATES/TIMES/£'s I WILL UPLOAD THIS AFTERNOON 3 Date received 10/01/2023 4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?] No it doesn't appear like it. 5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes 6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] Yes Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up Yes 7 Who is the parking company? Group Nexus 8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] New Square, West Bromwich For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. Yes BPA Summary I used the above car park and paid for my parking for one hour, 80p. I have a bank statement proving the date and time. I appealed to POPLA and they also advised I broke the terms and conditions. Nexus initial response: The Charge was issued and the signage is displayed in compliance with The British Parking Association’s Approved Operator Scheme Code of Practice and all relevant laws and regulations. While a parking fee was paid, we have been unable to locate a payment made for this vehicle registration or similar preventing a valid permit from being generated for this vehicle. We therefore believe a major keying error was made when your vehicle registration was entered. In light of this, on this occasion, your representations have been carefully considered and rejected. In accordance with paragraph 17.4 of the BPA Code of Practice, which states that “It is appreciated that in issuing a PCN in these instances, the operator will have incurred charges including but not limited to the DVLA fee and other processing costs therefore we believe that it is reasonable to seek to recover some of these costs by making a modest charge to the motorist of no more than £20 for a 14-day period from when the keying error was identified”, on this occasion only we will accept the reduced amount of £20 in full settlement of this Charge to cover our costs in correctly issuing this Charge and we will hold the charge at this rate for 14 days from the date of this correspondence, after which the Charge will revert to the full amount. POPLA verdict When assessing an appeal POPLA considers if the operator has issued the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) correctly and if the driver has complied with the terms and conditions for the use of the car park. The operator has provided photographs of the signage, which it has installed around the car park. These signs show the following terms and conditions: “Up to 1 Hours £0.80… If you park you agree to pay a Parking Charge Notice of £70 which may be issued if the following conditions are not observed: All customers must pay for parking”. The operator has issued a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) as the driver exceeded the maximum allowed stay and did not purchase additional parking. The Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) images the operator has provided show that the vehicle entered the car park on 17 December 2022 at 16:26 and left at 17:28. A total stay of one hour and two minutes. The operator has also provided a copy of a system printout, which shows if the vehicle was registered at that car park on the day in question, along with any payments made. The printout shows that the vehicle was not registered with a payment. I can also see that other payments were made at the site on the date in question. Based on this evidence the operator considers that a valid contract was formed. I will now consider if the appellants grounds of appeal impact upon this. The appellant advises that they paid for their parking and this payment is shown on their bank statement. I acknowledge that a payment was made but this payment is only valid if the drivers full and correct vehicle registration was entered. They explain that the operator has stated that it has been unable to locate the payment and has treated the case as a keying error. In cases where there is evidence that a payment was made but there has been an error with the vehicle registration the operator must offer a discount inline with the requirements of Section 17 of the British Parking Association code of practice. The operator has offered this discount and as such has complied with these requirements. They believe that CCTV from the site would verify their explanation. There is no evidence that the parking operator has CCTV on this car park as it used ANPR cameras to manage this car park. They feel that under the circumstances that PCN is unfair. The signs warn drivers that if they do not pay for parking they will receive a PCN. The driver failed to enter their registration and was offered a discount as such I cannot consider that the PCN is unfair. The appellant has provided a copy of a bank statement to support their appeal. This evidence is why the appellant has been offered a discount. By parking on site without a valid payment made against the drivers full and correct vehicle registration the driver has breached the terms and conditions for the use of the site. POPLA’s role is to assess if the operator has issued the PCN in accordance with the conditions of the contract. As the terms and conditions of the car park have not been met, I conclude that the operator has issued the PCN correctly, the appeal is refused. Where we stand now Nexus have now confirmed the £20 goodwill no longer is available so instead I have to pay £100. I have emailed my local MP but don't know if there is anything else I should do.