Tweet
Hello, I would be grateful for any guidance on this overstayed parking issue due to car broken down. I was issue with a PCN by CP Plus for £100 for this incident. I appealed to CP Plus / Nexus which was rejected. But they did state they would reduce it to £20 if I paid in 14 days as per The Private Parking Sector Single Code Of Practice annex ‘F’.
I appealed to OPTA and this was rejected. They also stated in the rejection that because my appeal had been rejected CP Plus were in their rights to cancel their reduction and pursue the full £100 charge.
Do I have to pay the full £100, can I pay the £20 or is their another alternative. Below is a detailed report of this mess.
Thank you
On 17 June 2025 I was parking in a car park operated by CP Plus Ltd in Greater Manchester, it has a 2.5 hr maximum stay. when I was about to leave within this time I was unable to do so because I discovered my car had broken down and I contacted the RAC. Told it would be a number of hours before they could attend. I called the Car park call centre and was told, If I e-mailed the CP Plus Ltd that I would be exempt given I've exceeded the time due to waiting on breakdown recovery. RAC estimated 4-5 hours before they could get there. I decided to get a taxi home, sent the email to CP Plus at info@groupnexus.co.uk. explaining the situation as advised, then at 10.30 got a taxi back to car park to meet RAC.
On June 28th I received a PCN from CP Plus for £100 because of a overstay in the car park on 17/06/2025.
On June 30th I received an e mail from Nexus Appeal confirming the issue of the PCN and asking for driver details. At the end it stated “We are placing this Charge on hold for 14 days from the date of this email to allow you to provide the details requested. “
On July 6th I replied to the email with driver details and reiterated the circumstances of the Breakdown ect and also the information I was given at the time by their Car Park control centre.
On July 8th I received this email from Nexus Appeal
Dear Sir/Madam,
Thank you for your correspondence relating to your Parking Charge.
The Charge was issued and the signage is displayed in compliance with the The Private Parking Sector Single Code of Practice and all relevant laws and regulations. Clear signs at the entrance of this site and throughout inform drivers of the 2.5-hour maximum stay and it is not possible to access any part of the premises without passing multiple signs. In light of this, on this occasion, your representations have been carefully considered and rejected.
In accordance with Annex F of the Single Code of Practice, which states that "parking operators must recognise...mitigating circumstances warranting a reduction in the amount of the parking charge...where the vehicle has broken down", on this occasion only we will accept the reduced amount of £20 in full settlement of this Charge to cover our costs in correctly issuing this Charge and we will hold the charge at this rate for 14 days from the date of this correspondence. If no payment is received within this period, and no further appeal to POPLA is made, the Charge will escalate and further costs may be added.
If no payment is received within this period, and no further appeal to POPLA is made, the Charge will escalate and further costs may be added.
Please find below the payment options:
Online: www.groupnexus.co.uk/pcn
By Telephone: Credit/Debit cards via our automated payment line: 0844 371 8784
By Post: Cheques or Postal Orders to: PO Box 1750, Northampton, NN1 9PN
----------
You have now reached the end of our internal appeals procedure. This correspondence represents our final stance on the matter and we will therefore not enter into any further correspondence.
CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED FOLLOWING THE REJECTION OF AN APPEAL WILL NOT CHANGE THE OUTCOME OR EXTEND THE DATE IN WHICH PAYMENT SHOULD BE MADE.
Although we have now rejected your appeal, you may still have recourse to appeal to Parking On Private Land Appeals (POPLA), an independent appeals service. An appeal to POPLA must be made within 28 days of the date of this correspondence. POPLA will only consider cases on the grounds that the Parking Charge exceeded the appropriate amount, that the vehicle was not improperly parked or had been stolen, or that you were otherwise not liable for the Parking Charge. To appeal to POPLA, please go to their website http://www.popla.co.uk and follow the instructions. If you would rather deal with this matter by post, please contact our Appeals Office and we will send you the necessary paperwork.
Your POPLA reference number is (please note this reference is for use only when appealing to POPLA): 1771895694
Please note that if your appeal does not relate to the above criteria or is rejected by POPLA for any reason, you will no longer qualify for payment at the reduced rate. POPLA will not consider any cases where payment has been made. You must pay the charge or appeal to POPLA, you cannot do both.
By law we are also required to inform you that Ombudsman Services (www.ombudsman-services.org/) provides an alternative dispute resolution service that would be competent to deal with your appeal. However, we have not chosen to participate in their alternative dispute resolution service. As such should you wish to appeal then you must do so to POPLA, as explained above.
Yours faithfully,
CP Plus Ltd
On 27th July I submitted an appeal to POPLA, explaining about the breakdown and advice I had been given.
On 3rd of September OPTA rejected my appeal.
Decision
Unsuccessful
Assessor Name
************
Assessor summary of operator case
The operator has issued the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) due to remaining at the site longer than the maximum stay period.
Assessor summary of your case
The appellant has raised the following points from their grounds of appeal: • Their car broke down in the car park. • They contacted the out of hours in the car park via phone and e-mail. • They informed them prior to the time limit expiring. • They were told that they would not receive a PCN if evidence was provided via e-mail. • The RAC turned up around 10:30 and they left around 10:50 which will be on their CCTV. • They intend to complete a SARS request for the parking operator’s CCTV. After reviewing the parking operator’s evidence, the appellant reiterates their grounds of appeal. The appellant has provided the following evidence in support of their appeal: 1. Confirmation of the RAC Rescue Report. 2. The e-mail they sent to the parking operator. The above evidence will be considered in making my determination.
Assessor supporting rational for decision
When assessing an appeal POPLA considers if the parking operator has issued the parking charge notice correctly and if the driver has complied with the terms and conditions for the use of the car park. The appellant has explained that their car broke down in the car park and their contacted the parking operator regarding this. This also contacted the RAC in order to repair their vehicle ad the appellant has provided evidence of their contact with both the parking operator and the RAC. Whilst I acknowledge this evidence, I am not satisfied that this is sufficient to cancel the PCN. The signage on this site explains that there is a maximum allowed stay time of 2.5 hours and that a £100 PCN would be issued for any contravention of the parking contract. The Private Parking Sector Single Code of Practice (The Code) sets the standards its parking operators need to comply with. The Appeals Charter is a statement on how certain circumstances should be handled by the parking operator. This details when a parking charge should be cancelled, and when a parking charge should be reduced to £20, when an appeal is based on an error or mitigating circumstances. Section F.3 of the Code lists specific circumstances where a parking operator must reduce a PCN to £20, subject to appropriate evidence being provided. Under paragraph c of the Code, the fee is required to be reduced if the vehicle had broken down and evidence was provided. The parking operator has then incurred costs to obtain the appellant’s details from the DVLA and issue the PCN. This is why the parking operator offers a reduced fee of no more than £20, to recover the costs incurred by the error. The parking operator offered the reduced charge of £20 in its letter dated 8 July 2025, as required. When the appellant brought their appeal to POPLA, they rejected this offer and the parking operator would be within its rights to seek the full PCN amount of £100. I note the appellant has raised an issue with the parking operator and how they corresponded with them in order to avoid a PCN. It is the remit of POPLA to determine if the PCN has been issued correctly based on the parking contract and this does not extend to complaints regarding the parking operator or how they manage their cases. If the appellant would like to take this complaint further, they could do so directly with the parking operator. I have included a link to their complaints policy here https://groupnexus.co.uk/complaints-policy. After considering the evidence from both parties, the appellant remained at the site for longer than the maximum stay period and therefore did not comply with the terms and conditions of the site. As such, I am satisfied the parking charge has been issued correctly and I must refuse the appeal.
I appealed to OPTA and this was rejected. They also stated in the rejection that because my appeal had been rejected CP Plus were in their rights to cancel their reduction and pursue the full £100 charge.
Do I have to pay the full £100, can I pay the £20 or is their another alternative. Below is a detailed report of this mess.
Thank you
On 17 June 2025 I was parking in a car park operated by CP Plus Ltd in Greater Manchester, it has a 2.5 hr maximum stay. when I was about to leave within this time I was unable to do so because I discovered my car had broken down and I contacted the RAC. Told it would be a number of hours before they could attend. I called the Car park call centre and was told, If I e-mailed the CP Plus Ltd that I would be exempt given I've exceeded the time due to waiting on breakdown recovery. RAC estimated 4-5 hours before they could get there. I decided to get a taxi home, sent the email to CP Plus at info@groupnexus.co.uk. explaining the situation as advised, then at 10.30 got a taxi back to car park to meet RAC.
On June 28th I received a PCN from CP Plus for £100 because of a overstay in the car park on 17/06/2025.
On June 30th I received an e mail from Nexus Appeal confirming the issue of the PCN and asking for driver details. At the end it stated “We are placing this Charge on hold for 14 days from the date of this email to allow you to provide the details requested. “
On July 6th I replied to the email with driver details and reiterated the circumstances of the Breakdown ect and also the information I was given at the time by their Car Park control centre.
On July 8th I received this email from Nexus Appeal
Dear Sir/Madam,
Thank you for your correspondence relating to your Parking Charge.
The Charge was issued and the signage is displayed in compliance with the The Private Parking Sector Single Code of Practice and all relevant laws and regulations. Clear signs at the entrance of this site and throughout inform drivers of the 2.5-hour maximum stay and it is not possible to access any part of the premises without passing multiple signs. In light of this, on this occasion, your representations have been carefully considered and rejected.
In accordance with Annex F of the Single Code of Practice, which states that "parking operators must recognise...mitigating circumstances warranting a reduction in the amount of the parking charge...where the vehicle has broken down", on this occasion only we will accept the reduced amount of £20 in full settlement of this Charge to cover our costs in correctly issuing this Charge and we will hold the charge at this rate for 14 days from the date of this correspondence. If no payment is received within this period, and no further appeal to POPLA is made, the Charge will escalate and further costs may be added.
If no payment is received within this period, and no further appeal to POPLA is made, the Charge will escalate and further costs may be added.
Please find below the payment options:
Online: www.groupnexus.co.uk/pcn
By Telephone: Credit/Debit cards via our automated payment line: 0844 371 8784
By Post: Cheques or Postal Orders to: PO Box 1750, Northampton, NN1 9PN
----------
You have now reached the end of our internal appeals procedure. This correspondence represents our final stance on the matter and we will therefore not enter into any further correspondence.
CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED FOLLOWING THE REJECTION OF AN APPEAL WILL NOT CHANGE THE OUTCOME OR EXTEND THE DATE IN WHICH PAYMENT SHOULD BE MADE.
Although we have now rejected your appeal, you may still have recourse to appeal to Parking On Private Land Appeals (POPLA), an independent appeals service. An appeal to POPLA must be made within 28 days of the date of this correspondence. POPLA will only consider cases on the grounds that the Parking Charge exceeded the appropriate amount, that the vehicle was not improperly parked or had been stolen, or that you were otherwise not liable for the Parking Charge. To appeal to POPLA, please go to their website http://www.popla.co.uk and follow the instructions. If you would rather deal with this matter by post, please contact our Appeals Office and we will send you the necessary paperwork.
Your POPLA reference number is (please note this reference is for use only when appealing to POPLA): 1771895694
Please note that if your appeal does not relate to the above criteria or is rejected by POPLA for any reason, you will no longer qualify for payment at the reduced rate. POPLA will not consider any cases where payment has been made. You must pay the charge or appeal to POPLA, you cannot do both.
By law we are also required to inform you that Ombudsman Services (www.ombudsman-services.org/) provides an alternative dispute resolution service that would be competent to deal with your appeal. However, we have not chosen to participate in their alternative dispute resolution service. As such should you wish to appeal then you must do so to POPLA, as explained above.
Yours faithfully,
CP Plus Ltd
On 27th July I submitted an appeal to POPLA, explaining about the breakdown and advice I had been given.
On 3rd of September OPTA rejected my appeal.
Decision
Unsuccessful
Assessor Name
************
Assessor summary of operator case
The operator has issued the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) due to remaining at the site longer than the maximum stay period.
Assessor summary of your case
The appellant has raised the following points from their grounds of appeal: • Their car broke down in the car park. • They contacted the out of hours in the car park via phone and e-mail. • They informed them prior to the time limit expiring. • They were told that they would not receive a PCN if evidence was provided via e-mail. • The RAC turned up around 10:30 and they left around 10:50 which will be on their CCTV. • They intend to complete a SARS request for the parking operator’s CCTV. After reviewing the parking operator’s evidence, the appellant reiterates their grounds of appeal. The appellant has provided the following evidence in support of their appeal: 1. Confirmation of the RAC Rescue Report. 2. The e-mail they sent to the parking operator. The above evidence will be considered in making my determination.
Assessor supporting rational for decision
When assessing an appeal POPLA considers if the parking operator has issued the parking charge notice correctly and if the driver has complied with the terms and conditions for the use of the car park. The appellant has explained that their car broke down in the car park and their contacted the parking operator regarding this. This also contacted the RAC in order to repair their vehicle ad the appellant has provided evidence of their contact with both the parking operator and the RAC. Whilst I acknowledge this evidence, I am not satisfied that this is sufficient to cancel the PCN. The signage on this site explains that there is a maximum allowed stay time of 2.5 hours and that a £100 PCN would be issued for any contravention of the parking contract. The Private Parking Sector Single Code of Practice (The Code) sets the standards its parking operators need to comply with. The Appeals Charter is a statement on how certain circumstances should be handled by the parking operator. This details when a parking charge should be cancelled, and when a parking charge should be reduced to £20, when an appeal is based on an error or mitigating circumstances. Section F.3 of the Code lists specific circumstances where a parking operator must reduce a PCN to £20, subject to appropriate evidence being provided. Under paragraph c of the Code, the fee is required to be reduced if the vehicle had broken down and evidence was provided. The parking operator has then incurred costs to obtain the appellant’s details from the DVLA and issue the PCN. This is why the parking operator offers a reduced fee of no more than £20, to recover the costs incurred by the error. The parking operator offered the reduced charge of £20 in its letter dated 8 July 2025, as required. When the appellant brought their appeal to POPLA, they rejected this offer and the parking operator would be within its rights to seek the full PCN amount of £100. I note the appellant has raised an issue with the parking operator and how they corresponded with them in order to avoid a PCN. It is the remit of POPLA to determine if the PCN has been issued correctly based on the parking contract and this does not extend to complaints regarding the parking operator or how they manage their cases. If the appellant would like to take this complaint further, they could do so directly with the parking operator. I have included a link to their complaints policy here https://groupnexus.co.uk/complaints-policy. After considering the evidence from both parties, the appellant remained at the site for longer than the maximum stay period and therefore did not comply with the terms and conditions of the site. As such, I am satisfied the parking charge has been issued correctly and I must refuse the appeal.
Comment