Hello, this is the first time I’ve posted so I hope this is okay...

The driver parked in a highview car park on 21/12/18, unfortunately the car park then became extremely busy, and traffic in this area of the car park was at a standstill. This car park allows parking for 3 hours but by the time The driver managed to leave it had been 6. The driver had finished shopping and went to leave after an hour, so overstayed through no fault of their own for a further 5 hours.

During this time The driver had a newborn and toddler with them, which made it impossible to join into the barely moving queue to leave (by barely moving, I mean the car next to them spent a good hour trying to get into the queue and by the time our 3 hours was up this car was still only a couple of cars up from mine.) after 3.5 hours The driver had to leave my car and go to collect their other children on foot, to return and try again.

Stupidly in the appeal to highview The driver mentioned that They had (after the 3 hours) had to abandon my car due to the queues and take their children to a local cafe to warm up. This evidently didn’t help the appeal as they’ve refused it on the basis that The driver left the site and went to another shop, clearly this wasn’t through choice Theyd rather have had the car.

The driver has submitted another appeal to POPLA this evening. If this isn’t extenuating circumstances I don’t know what is... does anyone know what the next step would be? They will absolutely not be paying this fine.

Also, The driver received this PCN on 7/01/19 if that’s relevant, The driver didn’t include this in the appeal however. The driver did include photos of the queueing and the woman who was having to stand in the road and direct traffic so the car park stood a chance of clearing! (In the appeal not here) Thank you

Edit your post NOW.

Always refer only to the Driver

The driver did this, the driver did that.

Too late as they already know who was driving.

Extenuating circumstances won't work.

And why would them knowing who the driver was mean it can’t be extenuating circumstances? Whether the driver was Dave or frank doesn’t make a difference to whether they were trapped in a car park or not?

They just want cash. They don't care and 'extenuating circumstances' don't exist.

Legally, a frustration of contract could apply. (That is the terms of the contract could not be complied with after being accepted)

POPLA only concern themselves on whether the ticket was issued correctly.

The discussion about the driver is that there was a dead cert win because they don't use the Protection of Freedoms Act. (But this Avenue has gone if the driver is known)

Ultimately, it's up to them whether they issue a court claim. They are not currently litigious but do have 6 years to pursue it.

That’s really helpful thank you Jlc, so potentially grounds to work with legally?

If POPLA refuse the appeal could there be further appeal or would it be a case of awaiting potential legal action?

Appealing to POPLA citing extenuating circumstances is futile.

Okay, I understood that but as I’ve said I already have appealed to POPLA I wondered if anyone knew what should be done next?

And what happens ‘when’ they decline the appeal?

The case gets passed to debt collectors who will send out a series of letters that can be ignored.

If you get a genuine letter before claim, you will have to deal with that.

Indeed, there is no further appeal; the only place that then matters is court. You need to be aware you DO NOT control that process - its at their dsicretion

If you move within 6 years of date of issue, send them a letter confirming your new ADDRESS FOR SERICE that they MUST use.

It would be prudent now to collect evidence of why there was standstill in traffic in case a court case is raised... Accident on the roads? What is the reason? Web pages reporting on such things tend to disappear after months or years, so downloading them now explaining why would be a good idea just in case a claim does arrive.

"and by the time the 3 hours was up" Just for good order to tie in with the rest of the post

Thank you all, The driver will be leaving it to go to court should they take it that far, they definitely won’t just be paying up.

Unfortunately The driver is not sure how best to collect the evidence as to why, other than perhaps screen shots of social media, as it’s a recurring issue although this is the worst the driver has seen it - the cause of the queues and fines are because of the appalling layout of the car park. There are 2 entrances, one exit, the one exit is controlled by traffic lights and before you reach those there’s a small round about - the exit from Sainsbury’s car park is to the right so they have right of way over cars leaving the car park in question. Which basically means that 2-3 cars get out of the retail park every time the lights are green when it’s busy, the car park has hundreds of spaces, the upper part of the car park have right of way over the bottom half of the car park where the driver was parked. When the car park isn’t very busy it’s easy to use, but when it’s busy it can be a nightmare to get out of, at rush hour purely due to layout it can take an hour to get out, the driver hadn’t anticipated that the queues would get as severe as they did on 21/12 or they never would have ventured there with a newborn or toddler!

You've been told that as much evidence of this as possible is needed I am sure it will have been in local papers, likely their website, etc. So do whatever you can to get this. Be creative.
Remember this is only civil court
You jsut need to tip the balance into your favour

Waiting to leave is not parking, Parking Eye lost on this in 2014 for a busy carpark!

Thats the spirit to show. Stick with it and listen to the regulars on here they offer good advice.

Get and download screenshots from social media. Preferably from ones on the day, but also get ones that show it is a recurring problem. This will help too as this shows it's an ongoing issue that the PPC should be well aware of and should therefore expect to allow for.

Thank you, that’s useful to know that a case was won in 2014 I’ll look into that

Thank you bearclaw, will do!

Highview never sue anyone at the tie of writing this, so ignore them - but publicise it.



Sorry the appeal was lost/will be lost.

The registered keeper would have won first time (one appeal) had they appealed using the usual forum templates from here or MSE, without saying who was driving. No POPLA needed.

POPLA do not deal with any form of extenuating circumstances
They even tell yo uthat

Did the driver argue frustration of contract in teh POPLA appeal? It will be interesting to see the response to that, if they did
Either way you cost Highview £30

Thanks all,

If they don’t deal with extenuating circumstances I don’t know why it’s an option to select on their form, bit misleading!

Unfortunately The driver didn’t know this forum existed until after submitting the popla appeal, however they are glad to have cost the theiving scumbags £30

The driver has taken many screen shots etc of relavant info should it be required at court, and will definitely be leaving it to go to court.

POPLA was devised by the BPA and they supplied the headings. All the headings are designed to entrap the motorist into making admissions and otherwise assisting the parking company.

The only heading that should be clicked is "Other".