09-30-2026, 04:59 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-01-2026, 02:01 AM by Tortfeasor.
Edit Reason: Info I didn’t have time to include earlier added
)
Hi @b789
I have received a response to the POPLA appeal today. I have attached a redacted pdf, and would be eternally grateful if you could give me your thoughts on the comments I can make.
They haven’t addressed a lot of the POPLA appeal points I made. Laughably the photos they have sent to POPLA of signage at the car park were clearly taken in the day! Surprise, surprise there is also the matter of the elusive Notice to Keeper, which was never received, but no explanation as to why this is the first time one has been produced by Horizon!
As ever, I can’t thank you enough for your help.
EDIT:
I was about to go out when I posted earlier. Just thought I’d mention some points around some of the things Horizon has chosen to focus on in its POPLA response. My opinion is Horizon has tried to pick holes in my initial July 10th appeal to it, which it didn’t bother to do when it initially replied to my appeal. Seems a bit odd to me as they haven’t addressed many of my POPLA appeal grounds and haven’t referred to my POPLA appeal grounds in turn. They clearly have read some of it though e.g. there is a cursory discussion about the landowner authority ground and the related evidence around that, which my appeal to POPLA asked Horizon to provide.
Horizon has been very selective about what it addresses though. There is nothing in Horizon’s POPLA response about the conflicting Your Parking Space signage and different, conflicting Ts and Cs found in the same car park, for example. Additionally, Horizon hasn’t accounted for why it is only now providing a copy of the original notice to keeper letter when it has previously failed to, including when Horizon claimed on August 5th in a response to my SAR that it didn’t hold any records with my name or address!
There was an odd timeline in this case anyhow, which you will probably gather from reading Horizon’s response and my previous posts.
- I didn’t receive a notice to keeper within 14 days of the parking event on May 22nd; I only received a reminder notice to keeper letter, with an issue date that was 40 days after the parking event.
- I initially appealed to Horizon on July 10th citing non-compliance with POFA, emphasising the statutory timescales for delivering a notice to keeper not being adhered to. It was a concise appeal (it’s at pages 3 and 4 of Horizon’s response) and, I think, expressed in clear terms.
Based on Horizon’s response about it to POPLA though, I think it’s either employing people deliberately choosing to be obtuse, or who are indeed dim-witted.
- Horizon’s first response to my appeal came on July 31st (it’s on pages 5 and 6 of Horizon’s response). Horizon requested more info from me, rejected my appeal and gave me a POPLA code. However, Horizon clearly also stated if I provided additional info to consider my appeal further and Horizon still rejected my appeal, it would issue a new POPLA code.
This seemed to be out of kilter with what I had read about how these processes usually worked, but I thought I may as well take Horizon up on what it was saying. It bought me some additional time if anything else.
- I was able to get a relative to take photos of the car park signs for me - I was working away at the time - and we both found some obvious issues with the car park entrance sign in particular. My relative told me there was no uplighting on the entrance sign and in her view at gone 10pm, it wouldn’t be visible unless you stood in front of it and shone a torch on it.
- I submitted the photos my relative took, with an explanatory note, to Horizon on August 7th.
I clearly stated in the note (shown on pages 10-12 of Horizon’s POPLA response) that the photos were taken while it was still daylight. I went on to say the entrance sign’s position - under a tree with no ambient or artificial lighting - would not allow for a driver to read it in hours of darkness. I also highlighted it was unsafe to expect a driver to have to divert their attention away from the road while driving around a live roundabout with a pedestrian crossing ahead, to read a sign with Ts and Cs.
Somehow Horizon has gone on in its POPLA appeal response to state my provided photos taken in daytime don’t show the sign wasn’t visible at night. However, Horizon hasn’t demonstrated that their signs were visible at night either! I had acknowledged in the explanatory note to Horizon on August 7th, which went with the photos my relative took, that the photos were taken in daylight.
Can Horizon’s “case handlers” or whatever they’re called even read, I wonder?
I had stated that nonetheless those daytime and Google Maps’ street view photos showed the entrance sign was under a tree. Furthermore, that there was no artificial lighting on said entrance sign. Therefore, not unreasonable to assume in hours of darkness that the sign would not be visible. Would have thought that would have been an obvious conclusion to reach, to a reasonably minded person!
Side point - I had put in the explanatory note on August 7th that I trusted Horizon would issue a new POPLA code if it rejected my appeal, as it had said it would do in its reply to me on July 31st. Somehow Horizon has stated in its POPLA response:
“ The Appellant requests a new POPLA verification code and a further 28 days to
appeal. A POPLA verification code is generated following the Operator’s appeal
decision and is valid for the prescribed appeal period. The Appellant has used the
code and submitted this appeal to POPLA. There is therefore no basis or requirement
to issue a second code for the same Parking Charge.”
What are they even on about? No, I didn’t. I was simply stating on August 7th that I hoped Horizon would follow through as it stated in its July 31st reply to me about issuing a fresh POPLA Code if it still rejected my appeal. It had taken 21 days to respond to my first appeal, after all. Time was running against me.
I’d argue they complicated this whole matter entirely because of their request for additional info in that July 31st response.
Oh, and the fact is Horizon did issue 2 POPLA Codes in my case anyhow. Their own responses to me, which they’ve included in the appeal response, show that.
It’s probably not really germane to the main issues in the case but I’m irked by how Horizon has chosen to make a point about me stating I hope they would keep to their word and supply a new POPLA code if they still rejected the appeal after I provided additional evidence. Horizon’s first reply to my appeal (31st July) can be read as giving me 3 options: pay up, supply additional evidence to us and we’ll look it at, or go straight to POPLA. I don’t think it was wrong of me to remind them they had said if I chose the give us additional evidence option that I would get a new POPLA code if they rejected the appeal again.
Ultimately though, Horizon has failed to comment on the photos and dashcam footage I provided in my POPLA appeal, which I captured at night on August 31st when I had returned from working away. These show the entrance sign wasn’t visible, as I had previously suggested it wouldn’t be. It’s under a large tree and there’s no artificial lighting near it!
I even embedded these August 31st night time photos and stills from the dashcam footage in the main body of the appeal to POPLA, which I submitted as a PDF containing my POPLA appeal grounds. I also attached the JPG and MP4 files separately.
Funnily enough I seem to be the only one who has provided any footage or photos to POPLA that shows what the entrance sign and that other sign near the store entrance within the car park is like at night, when the parking event occurred. Horizon has again provided several photos of signs in its response to POPLA, which are clearly all taken in the day! Theirs are shown at pages 53-56. So, again Horizon hasn’t addressed a significant part of my appeal to POPLA.
It’s ironic that Horizon has made a point about my August 5th photos not showing the contemporaneous conditions at the time of the parking event but hasn’t bothered to address the photos and footage I have provided showing conditions at night. Nor that it has failed to provide photos that showed the nighttime conditions as my POPLA appeal asked.
I’m finding this all very bizarre…
Most importantly Horizon hasn’t provided anything substantive to support that it correctly followed POFA in the first place, and delivered a notice to keeper in time. Horizon has stated on page 20 of its response: “ The Appellant appears to have treated the later reminder as though it were the first and only Notice to Keeper.” This is stating the obvious. Very clear from my first appeal that I was doing that and challenging them that no earlier notice had been delivered! Surely the question of, “well why didn’t Horizon counter this immediately when the appellant was first challenging you about this,” remains? Why is it still unanswered?
As can be seen from Horizon’s reply to me on July 31st, it just said it couldn’t be responsible for Royal Mail delivery times, when I had clearly challenged Horizon for not delivering a notice to keeper in time.
Also on page 20 within the main body of its POPLA response, Horizon states it has provided case records in Schedule C confirming the issue of an original notice to keeper, which they are claiming was sent on May 28th.
I must need a Specsaver’s appointment because I can’t see any “case records” in Schedule C, which is at pages 27-30 of Horizon’s response.
How can all of this be credible, I find myself asking? Horizon’s effectively telling POPLA: “yeah, we did send a first notice to keeper in time because we said we did. Here are our records of it,” but then not showing the case records they claim to have?
Another side point - I have also noticed Horizon has referred to the parking charge notice being issued on both May 27 and May 28th for the elusive original notice to keeper in its POPLA response! It even does this on the same page - page 20. I had the date down as May 27th because that was the date Horizon had put in the keeper reminder letter that it claimed it had originally issued the charge on.
Bearing in mind as of August 5th Horizon stated no such records of letters to me at my address were even held, surely this also undermines the reliability of Horizon’s records? Was someone at Horizon checking its records for charges issued on May 28th and not the 27th?
Gawd knows!
I’m also perplexed about the references to me stating in the parking operator’s appeal stage that I was a customer or the driver was a customer. I haven’t the foggiest about this. As can be seen from the appeal I submitted on July 10th, no reference is made to this as an appeal ground. The appeal solely focuses on non-compliance with POFA. The second part of the appeal (or my response to additional info that Horizon requested of me) was about defective signage.
Apologies if I’m coming across as an irate curmudgeon!
I hope this ends at the POPLA stage. I will struggle to not say something impolite and very politically incorrect about the author(s) and other employees of Horizon Parking if it goes further.
I have received a response to the POPLA appeal today. I have attached a redacted pdf, and would be eternally grateful if you could give me your thoughts on the comments I can make.
They haven’t addressed a lot of the POPLA appeal points I made. Laughably the photos they have sent to POPLA of signage at the car park were clearly taken in the day! Surprise, surprise there is also the matter of the elusive Notice to Keeper, which was never received, but no explanation as to why this is the first time one has been produced by Horizon!
As ever, I can’t thank you enough for your help.
EDIT:
I was about to go out when I posted earlier. Just thought I’d mention some points around some of the things Horizon has chosen to focus on in its POPLA response. My opinion is Horizon has tried to pick holes in my initial July 10th appeal to it, which it didn’t bother to do when it initially replied to my appeal. Seems a bit odd to me as they haven’t addressed many of my POPLA appeal grounds and haven’t referred to my POPLA appeal grounds in turn. They clearly have read some of it though e.g. there is a cursory discussion about the landowner authority ground and the related evidence around that, which my appeal to POPLA asked Horizon to provide.
Horizon has been very selective about what it addresses though. There is nothing in Horizon’s POPLA response about the conflicting Your Parking Space signage and different, conflicting Ts and Cs found in the same car park, for example. Additionally, Horizon hasn’t accounted for why it is only now providing a copy of the original notice to keeper letter when it has previously failed to, including when Horizon claimed on August 5th in a response to my SAR that it didn’t hold any records with my name or address!
There was an odd timeline in this case anyhow, which you will probably gather from reading Horizon’s response and my previous posts.
- I didn’t receive a notice to keeper within 14 days of the parking event on May 22nd; I only received a reminder notice to keeper letter, with an issue date that was 40 days after the parking event.
- I initially appealed to Horizon on July 10th citing non-compliance with POFA, emphasising the statutory timescales for delivering a notice to keeper not being adhered to. It was a concise appeal (it’s at pages 3 and 4 of Horizon’s response) and, I think, expressed in clear terms.
Based on Horizon’s response about it to POPLA though, I think it’s either employing people deliberately choosing to be obtuse, or who are indeed dim-witted.
- Horizon’s first response to my appeal came on July 31st (it’s on pages 5 and 6 of Horizon’s response). Horizon requested more info from me, rejected my appeal and gave me a POPLA code. However, Horizon clearly also stated if I provided additional info to consider my appeal further and Horizon still rejected my appeal, it would issue a new POPLA code.
This seemed to be out of kilter with what I had read about how these processes usually worked, but I thought I may as well take Horizon up on what it was saying. It bought me some additional time if anything else.
- I was able to get a relative to take photos of the car park signs for me - I was working away at the time - and we both found some obvious issues with the car park entrance sign in particular. My relative told me there was no uplighting on the entrance sign and in her view at gone 10pm, it wouldn’t be visible unless you stood in front of it and shone a torch on it.
- I submitted the photos my relative took, with an explanatory note, to Horizon on August 7th.
I clearly stated in the note (shown on pages 10-12 of Horizon’s POPLA response) that the photos were taken while it was still daylight. I went on to say the entrance sign’s position - under a tree with no ambient or artificial lighting - would not allow for a driver to read it in hours of darkness. I also highlighted it was unsafe to expect a driver to have to divert their attention away from the road while driving around a live roundabout with a pedestrian crossing ahead, to read a sign with Ts and Cs.
Somehow Horizon has gone on in its POPLA appeal response to state my provided photos taken in daytime don’t show the sign wasn’t visible at night. However, Horizon hasn’t demonstrated that their signs were visible at night either! I had acknowledged in the explanatory note to Horizon on August 7th, which went with the photos my relative took, that the photos were taken in daylight.
Can Horizon’s “case handlers” or whatever they’re called even read, I wonder?
I had stated that nonetheless those daytime and Google Maps’ street view photos showed the entrance sign was under a tree. Furthermore, that there was no artificial lighting on said entrance sign. Therefore, not unreasonable to assume in hours of darkness that the sign would not be visible. Would have thought that would have been an obvious conclusion to reach, to a reasonably minded person!
Side point - I had put in the explanatory note on August 7th that I trusted Horizon would issue a new POPLA code if it rejected my appeal, as it had said it would do in its reply to me on July 31st. Somehow Horizon has stated in its POPLA response:
“ The Appellant requests a new POPLA verification code and a further 28 days to
appeal. A POPLA verification code is generated following the Operator’s appeal
decision and is valid for the prescribed appeal period. The Appellant has used the
code and submitted this appeal to POPLA. There is therefore no basis or requirement
to issue a second code for the same Parking Charge.”
What are they even on about? No, I didn’t. I was simply stating on August 7th that I hoped Horizon would follow through as it stated in its July 31st reply to me about issuing a fresh POPLA Code if it still rejected my appeal. It had taken 21 days to respond to my first appeal, after all. Time was running against me.
I’d argue they complicated this whole matter entirely because of their request for additional info in that July 31st response.
Oh, and the fact is Horizon did issue 2 POPLA Codes in my case anyhow. Their own responses to me, which they’ve included in the appeal response, show that.
It’s probably not really germane to the main issues in the case but I’m irked by how Horizon has chosen to make a point about me stating I hope they would keep to their word and supply a new POPLA code if they still rejected the appeal after I provided additional evidence. Horizon’s first reply to my appeal (31st July) can be read as giving me 3 options: pay up, supply additional evidence to us and we’ll look it at, or go straight to POPLA. I don’t think it was wrong of me to remind them they had said if I chose the give us additional evidence option that I would get a new POPLA code if they rejected the appeal again.
Ultimately though, Horizon has failed to comment on the photos and dashcam footage I provided in my POPLA appeal, which I captured at night on August 31st when I had returned from working away. These show the entrance sign wasn’t visible, as I had previously suggested it wouldn’t be. It’s under a large tree and there’s no artificial lighting near it!
I even embedded these August 31st night time photos and stills from the dashcam footage in the main body of the appeal to POPLA, which I submitted as a PDF containing my POPLA appeal grounds. I also attached the JPG and MP4 files separately.
Funnily enough I seem to be the only one who has provided any footage or photos to POPLA that shows what the entrance sign and that other sign near the store entrance within the car park is like at night, when the parking event occurred. Horizon has again provided several photos of signs in its response to POPLA, which are clearly all taken in the day! Theirs are shown at pages 53-56. So, again Horizon hasn’t addressed a significant part of my appeal to POPLA.
It’s ironic that Horizon has made a point about my August 5th photos not showing the contemporaneous conditions at the time of the parking event but hasn’t bothered to address the photos and footage I have provided showing conditions at night. Nor that it has failed to provide photos that showed the nighttime conditions as my POPLA appeal asked.
I’m finding this all very bizarre…
Most importantly Horizon hasn’t provided anything substantive to support that it correctly followed POFA in the first place, and delivered a notice to keeper in time. Horizon has stated on page 20 of its response: “ The Appellant appears to have treated the later reminder as though it were the first and only Notice to Keeper.” This is stating the obvious. Very clear from my first appeal that I was doing that and challenging them that no earlier notice had been delivered! Surely the question of, “well why didn’t Horizon counter this immediately when the appellant was first challenging you about this,” remains? Why is it still unanswered?
As can be seen from Horizon’s reply to me on July 31st, it just said it couldn’t be responsible for Royal Mail delivery times, when I had clearly challenged Horizon for not delivering a notice to keeper in time.
Also on page 20 within the main body of its POPLA response, Horizon states it has provided case records in Schedule C confirming the issue of an original notice to keeper, which they are claiming was sent on May 28th.
I must need a Specsaver’s appointment because I can’t see any “case records” in Schedule C, which is at pages 27-30 of Horizon’s response.
How can all of this be credible, I find myself asking? Horizon’s effectively telling POPLA: “yeah, we did send a first notice to keeper in time because we said we did. Here are our records of it,” but then not showing the case records they claim to have?
Another side point - I have also noticed Horizon has referred to the parking charge notice being issued on both May 27 and May 28th for the elusive original notice to keeper in its POPLA response! It even does this on the same page - page 20. I had the date down as May 27th because that was the date Horizon had put in the keeper reminder letter that it claimed it had originally issued the charge on.
Bearing in mind as of August 5th Horizon stated no such records of letters to me at my address were even held, surely this also undermines the reliability of Horizon’s records? Was someone at Horizon checking its records for charges issued on May 28th and not the 27th?
Gawd knows!
I’m also perplexed about the references to me stating in the parking operator’s appeal stage that I was a customer or the driver was a customer. I haven’t the foggiest about this. As can be seen from the appeal I submitted on July 10th, no reference is made to this as an appeal ground. The appeal solely focuses on non-compliance with POFA. The second part of the appeal (or my response to additional info that Horizon requested of me) was about defective signage.
Apologies if I’m coming across as an irate curmudgeon!
I hope this ends at the POPLA stage. I will struggle to not say something impolite and very politically incorrect about the author(s) and other employees of Horizon Parking if it goes further.
