05-18-2026, 02:34 PM
Welcome to the forum @L Bow. The first thing we need to see is the original Notice to Keeper (NtK). Please upload clear images of both sides of the original NtK, not any reminder, with only your name, address, vehicle registration, PCN reference redacted. Leave all dates, times, location wording, contravention wording, payment wording and PoFA wording visible.
On the dates you have given, the NtK was issued too late for keeper liability under PoFA. The alleged event was 6 April 2026. The NtK is dated 17 April 2026 and would be deemed given on 21 April 2026, which appears to be day 15. If no windscreen notice was served, Horizon had to deliver the NtK within the relevant 14-day period. If they failed to do so, they cannot hold the registered keeper liable, unless the driver has been identified.
That is why we need to be careful about what was said in the initial appeal. If the appeal said, in substance, “I was there using the EV charger”, Horizon may argue that the appellant identified themselves as the driver. That does not necessarily mean the position is hopeless, but it may weaken or remove the strongest PoFA point if POPLA treats it as a driver admission.
The attached charging invoice does not necessarily identify the driver. It may only show that the vehicle was connected to the charger, or that an account holder paid for charging. However, the wording used in the appeal matters. A dropdown selection stating that “I was there to use the EV charging facilities” is risky because it is written in the first person, but is not evidence in itself that the person charging the vehicle was the driver.
Please also upload Horizon’s rejection letter. Sometimes the rejection quotes or summarises what was said in the appeal, which may help us assess whether the driver has actually been identified or whether Horizon are merely assuming it.
For now, do not assume the late NtK point has definitely been lost. But equally, do not rely on it alone until we have seen the NtK, the rejection, and any wording Horizon have recorded from the appeal. If the driver has been identified, the POPLA appeal will need to focus more heavily on the EV charging issue, unclear or inadequate signage, the separate GeniePoint charging arrangement, lack of clear notice that EV charging users must also register inside Premier Inn, and Horizon’s authority to impose a charge on a genuine user of the site.
If you can show us the wording used in your letters to Genie and Premier Inn and their subsequent responses, that would be useful too.
There are often several issues with EV charging cases where the charger is located within a private car park that has its own parking terms. The key question is whether the signage made it clear that someone using the EV charger also had to register inside the Premier Inn or obtain separate authorisation.
Simply using the charger, paying GeniePoint, and occupying a marked EV charging bay may well make you a legitimate site user. If Horizon wanted to impose an additional registration requirement on EV charging users, that requirement needed to be clearly and prominently brought to the driver’s attention before any alleged contract could be formed.
That is why we need to see the original NtK, the rejection, and any signage photos if you have them.
On the dates you have given, the NtK was issued too late for keeper liability under PoFA. The alleged event was 6 April 2026. The NtK is dated 17 April 2026 and would be deemed given on 21 April 2026, which appears to be day 15. If no windscreen notice was served, Horizon had to deliver the NtK within the relevant 14-day period. If they failed to do so, they cannot hold the registered keeper liable, unless the driver has been identified.
That is why we need to be careful about what was said in the initial appeal. If the appeal said, in substance, “I was there using the EV charger”, Horizon may argue that the appellant identified themselves as the driver. That does not necessarily mean the position is hopeless, but it may weaken or remove the strongest PoFA point if POPLA treats it as a driver admission.
The attached charging invoice does not necessarily identify the driver. It may only show that the vehicle was connected to the charger, or that an account holder paid for charging. However, the wording used in the appeal matters. A dropdown selection stating that “I was there to use the EV charging facilities” is risky because it is written in the first person, but is not evidence in itself that the person charging the vehicle was the driver.
Please also upload Horizon’s rejection letter. Sometimes the rejection quotes or summarises what was said in the appeal, which may help us assess whether the driver has actually been identified or whether Horizon are merely assuming it.
For now, do not assume the late NtK point has definitely been lost. But equally, do not rely on it alone until we have seen the NtK, the rejection, and any wording Horizon have recorded from the appeal. If the driver has been identified, the POPLA appeal will need to focus more heavily on the EV charging issue, unclear or inadequate signage, the separate GeniePoint charging arrangement, lack of clear notice that EV charging users must also register inside Premier Inn, and Horizon’s authority to impose a charge on a genuine user of the site.
If you can show us the wording used in your letters to Genie and Premier Inn and their subsequent responses, that would be useful too.
There are often several issues with EV charging cases where the charger is located within a private car park that has its own parking terms. The key question is whether the signage made it clear that someone using the EV charger also had to register inside the Premier Inn or obtain separate authorisation.
Simply using the charger, paying GeniePoint, and occupying a marked EV charging bay may well make you a legitimate site user. If Horizon wanted to impose an additional registration requirement on EV charging users, that requirement needed to be clearly and prominently brought to the driver’s attention before any alleged contract could be formed.
That is why we need to see the original NtK, the rejection, and any signage photos if you have them.
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience. - Mark Twain
