yes, they did send me a POPLA Ref.

Hi, having successfully defended my own UKPC parking charge a new one landed on my desk for my 20 year old son. He parked on a pub car park. This car park has been used for decades by the local community for shops opposite. It is now a Pesto restaurant and charges have been put in place with a maximum 20 minutes stay if you are not a customer of the restaurant provided you enter your registration number into the machine. However my son didnt realise this although there is a sign on the way telling you there are parking restrictions. He was actually waiting to pick up a friend and was there for 31 minutes - 11 minutes over the allowed time (although he hadnt put his registration number in so the whole time would probably count). They got pictures on the way in and on the way out. I sent in his appeal: "I wish to appeal the parking invoice you have sent to me. Firstly the car was not "parked" at any time during its stay and the engine was running therefore it was not interrupting any customer of Pesto from parking. THE AMOUNT DEMANDED IS NOT A 'GENUINE PRE-ESTIMATE OF LOSS' The parking charge of £100 does not represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss to yourself or the landowner and the payment of £100 is an unenforceable penalty clause. Following Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v Selfridge & Co Ltd [1915] AC 847, clauses designed to punish a party for breach of contract may only be upheld if they represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss. The provision is a penalty and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss for the following reasons: (a) you are not the landowner and suffer no loss whatsoever as a result of a parking overstay; (b) the amount claimed is evidently disproportionate to any loss suffered by you; © the penalty bears no relation to the circumstances because it remains the same no matter whether a motorist overstays by ten seconds or ten years Further and alternatively, the provision requiring payment of £100 is unenforceable as an unfair term contrary to Regulation 5 of The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. This is a term which falls within Schedule 1, paragraph (e) of the Regulations being a term "requiring any consumer who fails to fulfil his obligation to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation". The term was not individually negotiated and causes a significant imbalance in the parties' respective rights and obligations, because the charge is heavily disproportionate in respect of a short overstay and is imposed even where consumers are legitimately using the carpark for its designated purpose. There were only a few cars present, plenty of empty spaces, thus neither businesses nor customers at the site suffered any loss or were even inconvenienced. I believe that ParkingEYE are actually pursuing a claim for their own profit as opposed to quantifying an actual breach and loss. This is contrary to the BPA AOS Code of Practice recommendations, section 19.5, which states: "If the parking charge that the driver is being asked to pay is for a breach of contract or act of trespass, this charge must be based on the genuine pre-estimate of loss that you suffer." ParkingEye is NOT ENTITLED TO PURSUE CHARGES. PrivateEye has not showed that it has a contract with the landowner to grant them the right to form contracts with drivers and to pursue charges in their own name in the courts. I require ParkingEYE to produce a copy of the contract with the landowner as without it, ParkingEYEis not compliant with section 7 of the BPA AOS Code of Practice and has no legal authority at this site. I fully expect this appeal to be upheld and notice of withdrawal issued forthwith." They have now replied that the appeal is unsuccessful and basically refer to the case of ParkingEye v. Barry Beavis and Martin Wardley. I could upload their letter - 4 pages if needs be. Can anyone help with my POPLA appeal? or should we just pay it?

Many thanks for all your help. I'll let you know what happens.

I drafted a reply for the on-line appeal. The company is UKPC. I had a look on various sites for an answer and drafted the following: "I am appealing this ticket. It is grossly unfair and I will not be paying it or other any sums you might choose to add to it. It is unfair for several reasons. (1) At the time of parking there was another vehicle parked to my left and I appropriately parked close to that vehicle - that vehicle as obviously left the scene prior to the photographs being taken which then leaves me looking like I have just pulled in between two bays. I parked where I did as at the time I had a Police Dog Puppy in the car and wanted to be close to the store for that reason. (2) Regardless of (1) above, the car park was not busy and there was a high volume of empty parking bays. (3) The landowner does not charge for parking on this site and I therefore did not prevent anyone else from parking and did not prevent the landowner from earning money. Therefore no loss has been incurred by the landowner and any penalty to me is a wholly disproportionate penalty. (4) The signage on the way into the car park only states there is a 4 hour parking limit. As I was only going to be at the site for 30 minutes I did not therefore consider it necessary to look for and read the signage regarding the 4 hour parking limit. (5) The signage you do refer to cannot be read until I have already parked my car; (6) You have not provided me with any contract between yourselves and the landowner that confirms you have permission from the landowner to enter into a contract with myself. (7) Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 only gives you authority to obtain my details where parking fees have not been paid. There are no parking fees to be paid at this site and you are therefore in breach of this Act." Too much?? Could you also explain "Once you state that the debt is not a Genuine Pre estimate of Loss" - is this to do with the actual loss to the landowner for parking in this way? Sorry to be a pest.

I have a photograph of the sign in the car park but not one on the way into the car park - I can get one though. The sign in the car park - on lamp posts is: [ATTACH=CONFIG]51332[/ATTACH]

Hi, the charge date is the 27th April 2014 and we recvd the letter today.

Can someone please assist. I have today received a £100 fine for parking at a local retail park. I do admit to straddling the white line of the parking bay - at the time of parking there was another car parked to my left and I merely (perhaps stupidly) parked close to him - therefore myself straddling the next bay. They have pictures of my car by itself (the other car having left by this stage) and also a picture of a ticket on my car. I never received the ticket that was left on my car despite me only being in the shop for 30 minutes. There are signs on the way into the car park stating "4 hour parking restriction - see signs for details". As I am never there for longer than an hour I have never bothered to look at the signs which state, amongst other things, that cars must be parked in bays correctly. At the time of parking my car the car park was probably only about 1/3rd full. There is no charge for parking on this site. Is there any way I can appeal? Thank you.