PCN Excel Crossley Retail Park, Halifax

[b789]

Well done. Let's see their excuses now.

   

[3Sh3roo]

Well done. Let's see their excuses now.

The keeper has not received any acknowledgements via email, is that normal?

[b789]

Yes, that can be normal. A lack of email acknowledgement does not mean the complaint or appeal was not submitted, especially where a general contact form is being used rather than a proper appeal portal with an automated receipt.

What matters now is evidence. You should keep:

screenshots of the completed form before submission

• a screenshot of the confirmation screen after submission, if there was one
  
• the exact text that was submitted
  
• the date and time of submission
  

If there was no confirmation screen and no email acknowledgement, that is not ideal, but it is not fatal. It simply means you should be ready to show that you made a genuine attempt to lodge the complaint and appeal through the only reasonable online route available.

If Excel later try to say no appeal was made, the response is straightforward: their portal was unsuitable because it forced driver-style admissions, so you used the general contact route to submit a formal complaint that also had to be treated as an appeal.

A short follow-up message through the same contact page can also be sent saying:

I submitted a formal complaint and appeal regarding PCN [number] on [date] via your contact form. No acknowledgement has been received. Please confirm receipt and confirm that it is being treated as an appeal under section 11.2 of the PPSCoP and under your complaints policy.

That creates a second timestamped record.

[3Sh3roo]

Thanks for this, there was a confirmation screen, please see image below, interesting they advise that this form cannot be used to appeal a parking charge? I guess the keeper does have the evidence needed.

I also sent a follow up message as advised above, kept a screenshot of before/after and emailed to the keeper to get a timestamp.

[b789]

...interesting they advise that this form cannot be used to appeal a parking charge? I guess the keeper does have the evidence needed.

I also sent a follow up message as advised above, kept a screenshot of before/after and emailed to the keeper to get a timestamp.

That's just their corrupt way of trying to avoid their own liability. The PPSCoP clearly states at section 11.2 and 11.3 as follows:

11.2. Where a parking operator receives a complaint that it considers to be or include an appeal against the validity of a parking charge, the parking operator must also treat it as an appeal for the purposes of applying the timescales in Clause 8.4, and should inform the complainant as such unless and until it is clear that the complaint is not relevant to an appeal or the complainant informs the parking operator that they do not wish it to be so handled.

NOTE: It might not be immediately apparent that a complaint served as such relates to one or more specific parking charges, possibly by way of a clarification that reveals that an appeal would be worthwhile, hence parking operators are advised to record and handle complaints as appeals until they are found conclusively not to be so or patently refer to matters not relevant to the validity of a parking charge.

11.3. A complaint must be acknowledged by the parking operator within 14 days of its receipt unless exceptional circumstances apply, in which case the complainant must be kept informed by the operator.

If you don't receive any response within 14 days you can complain directly to the BPA. Their rules clearly state that an appeal included within a complaint, then it must be treated as one. As their only route online to make a complaint is their contact form, then you have complied with their silly rules and the ball is in their court.

PPSCoP v1.1

[3Sh3roo]

The keeper received the below email from them after sending a follow up:

-----------
From: cpo@excelparking.co.uk
To: xx
Sent: Tuesday, 31 March 2026 at 17:33:18 BST
Subject: Re: Website Contact Form

Good Afternoon

We can confirm we have no record of a formal complaint being received in relation to the below

If you have any evidence of submitting this complaint and wish to send this, we would be more than happy to investigate this

If you wish for us to review the below as your formal complaint, please confirm this. If you wish to provide any other information that was not included in the below please provide this,

Please note we will not begin to review the below until you have confirmed if you have anything further to add, to avoid any points you wish to raise being missed. Once you have confirmed if you wish to add anything further, we will acknowledge and respond, if applicable, as per our complaints policy

Yours sincerely,

Central Processing Office
EXCEL PARKING SERVICES LTD
7 Europa View, Sheffield Business Park,
Sheffield. S9 1XH
t:    +44 (0) 114 261 7111
-----------

Should the keeper now use this email address and resend the contents of the first appeal as they are claiming they have not received anything?

[b789]

Yes. You should now use that email address and resend the complaint and appeal there. Please show us the email address used as it will be useful for future correspondence.

Excel have expressly opened that complaint/appeal channel by inviting confirmation and further information, so it should now be used to box them in. You should not just resend it as a complaint. Make clear that it is both your formal complaint and your formal appeal against the PCN, and that it must be treated as both under section 11.2 of the PPSCoP.

You should also attach the 9 screenshots. They are not proof that Excel actually received the original webform submission, but they are contemporaneous evidence of your attempted submission and of the fact that Excel’s system is wholly unfit for purpose because it provides no acknowledgement, no copy of the submission and no independent proof of delivery.

So yes, use that email address now, resend the full complaint and appeal, attach the screenshots, and make clear that any failure of their webform or internal systems is their problem, not yours.

Dear Excel Central Processing Office,

A formal complaint and appeal were previously submitted via your website contact form. Your system generated no acknowledgement, no copy of the submission and no independent proof of delivery. That is not a neutral administrative failure. It is a system design that conveniently deprives consumers of evidence and then allows Excel to assert that nothing was received.

You now state that you have no record of the complaint. If your systems failed to record or retain a complaint submitted through your own website, that is your failure, not mine. If, as appears, your webform is deliberately configured so that consumers are left without any evidential record of submission, that raises serious concerns as to deliberate subterfuge and unfair commercial practice.

I attach 9 contemporaneous screenshots showing the text of the complaint and appeal as entered into your webform at the time of the original submission attempt. Those screenshots are the only evidence available because your system provides no acknowledgement, no copy of the submitted form and no other means by which a consumer can retain proof of submission. The fact that 9 screenshots were required merely to preserve the text entered into your small comment box only serves to underline how wholly unfit for purpose your system is for the submission of a proper complaint or keeper appeal.

The position is aggravated by the fact that your appeals portal is itself unsuitable for a registered keeper appeal because it forces first-person driver-based admissions such as “I did this” or “I did that”. In other words, the consumer is first funnelled towards a defective appeals process and then, when attempting to use an alternative webform, is left without any proof of submission. That combination is plainly unacceptable.

For the avoidance of doubt, I now restate the matter by email. This email is my formal complaint and my formal appeal against the Parking Charge Notice. It must be treated as both. Under Section 11.2 of the Private Parking Single Code of Practice, where a complaint includes a challenge to the validity of a parking charge it must also be treated as an appeal. It is not to be treated as a complaint only.

I am the registered keeper. I deny any liability for this charge.

Your Notice to Keeper does not comply with Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and you are therefore unable to transfer liability from the unknown driver to the registered keeper. In particular, the Notice to Keeper fails to comply with paragraph 9(2)(a) because it does not specify any period of parking. It states only a single contravention time of 16:23. A single timestamp is not a period of parking.

That defect is fatal to any attempt to rely on keeper liability. The statutory conditions must be met in full. As they have not been met, there is no keeper liability in this case.

There will be no admission as to the identity of the driver and no assumptions can be made in that regard.

In the circumstances, this charge must be cancelled.

If you refuse, then please treat this as a request for all photographs taken, all notes made by the operative, and a full copy of the notice relied upon.

Any attempt to sidestep the appeal process, or to rely on the inadequacy of your own systems as a basis for denying receipt of the earlier complaint, may be relied upon in subsequent complaints to the relevant authorities, including the CMA, as evidence of an unfair and obstructive consumer process.

Please now acknowledge safe receipt of this email and confirm that it is being treated as both my formal complaint and my formal appeal.

Yours faithfully,

[3Sh3roo]

Perfect thanks, their email address is cpo@excelparking.co.uk so can be used in future by others for appeals.

[3Sh3roo]

Response as follows from Excel:

From: cpo@excelparking.co.uk <cpo@excelparking.co.uk>
To: xxxx
Sent: Thursday, 2 April 2026 at 15:39:00 BST
Subject: Re[2]: Website Contact Form

Good Afternoon

We can confirm that no prior correspondence has been received in relation to PCN EPSxxxxxxxxx.

We also confirm that the appeals portal allows motorists to select that the are the registered keeper of a vehicle as opposed to the driver should they wish to do so. The text box then allows free typing where motorists can advise of the content of the appeal. Once an appeal is submitted through the correct channel, an auto-response confirmation is sent.

Notwithstanding the above, we now confirm receipt of the below, which will be reviewed solely as an appeal at this time. In line with the International Parking Community (IPC) guidelines and our complaints policy, if a complaint relates to, or includes, an appeal (challenge) against a Parking Charge Notice it will be dealt in accordance with our Appeals Process if still within the relevant timeframe to do so. Your appeal will therefore be reviewed in accordance with the relevant procedures, and a response will be provided in due course.

As stated on the Notice sent to you, the appeals team have 28 days to review and respond. If you have any further information to add that you wish to be reviewed, please ensure to submit this via the appeals portal or, if you have difficulty with an online portal, via this email only, to ensure receipt.

We advise to regularly check your spam/junk folders and contact us if you have not had a response after 28 days

Yours sincerely
Central Processing Office
EXCEL PARKING SERVICES LTD
7 Europa View, Sheffield Business Park,
Sheffield. S9 1XH
t:    +44 (0) 114 261 7111

[b789]

They are now expressly treating what you sent by email as an appeal, which is the main thing that mattered. That means the appeal is now safely in play and they have boxed themselves in on timing.

Their attempt to defend the portal is beside the point. The problem was never whether a keeper can tick a box saying they are the registered keeper. The problem is that the mandatory “reason” wording is framed in the first person as though the appellant is describing what they themselves did, which is plainly unsuitable for a keeper who is not admitting to being the driver.

For now, I would not get dragged into a side argument about that. They have confirmed receipt, confirmed they will review it as an appeal, and confirmed that this email address can be used if there is difficulty with the portal. That is enough. Keep that email safe.

If/when they reject, then we deal with the rejection and their inevitable nonsense at the next stage. If they fail to respond within 28 days, that becomes another point against them.