Popla Reviews 

Utterly useless organisation. I am furious because I genuinely thought they would show some vague interest in my case - but clearly it’s yet another “independent” organisation that’s totally out of its depth.
I send a detailed case on some crook parking companies, the parking company reply back with evidence, I comment on why their evidence is shady… the reply from popla? We can’t comment on new evidence? So what exactly is the point? If a parking company is sending over their evidence that I can disprove, but popla can’t use my comments, what’s even the point of popla? Don’t waste your time. Dreadful

I lost my appeal as I stated that the signs about charging were not visable from the side I came in on and sent photos clearly showing this, it was ignored as i used google street view. This is wrong as its the same view as now clearly showing no signs why was i not informed to visit to take photos as up to date map view is not acceptable how stupid.
I do not believe they are a neutral as state

For a parking fine at Aldi even though I definitely put in my reg and had proof of my shopping which they said would be absolutely efficient evidence to cancel the fine. Gone through the appeal sending every bit of evidence needed and today get told they reject it and I still have to pay. Both parking eye and POPLA are
Companies making alot of money even when you provide evidence. Has anyone taken these to court?

I wish I could give POPLA zero stars. I went into the process believing it was an independent appeals service, but the outcome received was so heavily skewed in favour of the BPA operator that it would be laughable if it weren’t so serious.

The assessor ignored key evidence, accepted the operator’s assertions without scrutiny, and even made factual assumptions that were never supported by the operator’s own documents. The most astonishing part came afterwards: in response to my formal complaint, POPLA admitted that the operator had not proved they held written landowner authority — a mandatory requirement under the BPA Code of Practice. Despite this, POPLA simply assumed the operator must have consent anyway. That alone tells you everything you need to know about the direction of their bias.

Other issues raised were skipped over with no real engagement with the evidence submitted. The whole process felt predetermined, as though POPLA’s role is to rubber‑stamp operator PCNs rather than genuinely assess their validity.

If you’re expecting an impartial, evidence‑based review, prepare to be disappointed. POPLA may claim independence, but my experience shows a system that consistently defaults to the operator’s narrative, even when the operator fails to meet the most basic evidential requirements.

**UPDATE** POPLA has just replied to a complaint stating "the assessor should have explained this within his rationale and I am disappointed that was not discussed". This review should not be characterised as disagreement with the outcome but of the process.

Agree with all the other comments , waste of time appealing through POPLA. My experience recently was parking at Britania west quay Southampton . I arrived and wanted to pay for 2 hours parking but the machine only let me pay until 8 pm which I paid , ( I arrived at 630pm) the signs said from 8 pm , 1 hour was free and after that an evening tariff was needed. I arrived back at 830pm. Then get a parking ticket for £60. The signs were incorrect and I have heard of 100s of other people getting a fine for the exact same situation. It's been highlighted by trading standards and in all the local papers. They have since had to change their signs as there were so many complaints about them. Many people are now trying to complain and have the fines they have paid refunded.

Despite this I received an email from popla today saying my appeal had been declined and I now have to pay the higher fee of £100.
It's disgraceful and if I don't pay I will no doubt get letters threatening me with court and an escalating parking fines.
POPLA have not looked at my case at all I sent in clear photos of the signs saying 1 hour free from 8 pm ( nothing about this not being the case if you were arriving earlier than this with a paid ticket) and the parking ticket I was able to buy until 8 pm. The signs have since been changed , this in itself and the 100s of other people who have received tickets in the same situation proofs that the signs were incorrect and definitely not clear, and investigations by trading standards and yet POPLA have still said I need to pay this fine.

Work for privateland,and dont even listen to people that gave mobility issues..Blue badge or crutches...yet ask for someone else to look at it,same person looked at it again.

10 minutes grace 4 minutes over £100 !!

No fair justice, private land carry on robbing people..Cost of living .
Dont matter to anyone .

Disgusting

Ring there number to talk to some about a parking charge at a car park own by to operators no separating payed for parking but with the wrong operators but they took more than 28 days to tell me so could not appeal so no ten didget number so if you want to talk to popla about this then ring our number ? and No you can't talk to any one??????? So I guess I'll pay the charge because they are no help. CANT TO THE CAR PARK OPERATORS, CANT TALK TO POPLA ,CANT TALK TO A PERSON ANYMORE JUST AUTOMATED VOICES THAT TELLS YOU NOTHING WANTS THE POINT OF APPEALING TO POPLA???? DO THEY GET A CUT OF THE CHARGE ??? Update oh my word they sent me an automated message giving me the number to there automated telephone service and as I said I don't have a ten digit number I need to speak to a human being????????.

Popla - no car registration link to payment- you can’t pay unless you have entered a registration and as already evident from other people no account taken of payment confirmed with bank statement
Clearly some technical issue and yet the appeal doesn’t address this - how is this an appropriate appeal process then? Unethical.

POPLA acknowledged every single ground of my appeal in detail and then dismissed every one of them with the same blanket response — the signs were there and no registration was entered. There was no genuine engagement with the circumstances whatsoever. A 13 minute overstay caused by a 15 minute service delay by the retailer, an operator who rejected my appeal without requesting any evidence, and a retailer who admitted in writing they had previously intervened in exactly these situations — none of it mattered. The outcome was predetermined. An independent appeals service should engage with the merits of a case, not simply rubber stamp the operator’s position. A complete waste of time.

UPDATE following anticipated POPLA reply:

Thank you for confirming what I suspected throughout this process. POPLA cannot overturn a charge based on mitigating circumstances. Given that the vast majority of appeals involve exactly that, your service provides the appearance of independent oversight without the substance of it. Motorists have no genuine recourse if the operator simply follows process, justified or not. That is not a consumer protection service. It is a system designed to favour operators. As said, a waste of time, and well you know it.

I appealed a parking charge issued by VARS after parking for more than one hour at a Starbucks car park. One of the main reasons for my appeal was simple: there were no clearly visible signs in the car park showing the restriction.

VARS then submitted photographs which supposedly proved that the signage was there.

The problem? I challenged those photographs because, in my view, they did not accurately represent the car park at the time of the alleged parking contravention. Some appeared to be edited, outdated or otherwise misleading.

I raised this directly with POPLA and specifically questioned the authenticity and reliability of the photographic evidence.

What did POPLA do?

Apparently nothing.

They simply accepted the operator's case and rejected my appeal without properly addressing one of the most serious points I had raised.

If a parking company is relying on photographs to demand money from somebody, surely the absolute minimum an independent appeals service should do is establish:

When were the photographs taken?
Do they actually show the car park as it was on the date of the alleged contravention?
Have the images been edited or altered?
Can the operator provide the original photographs and metadata?
Why do the images not match what was actually visible at the site?

Instead, my concerns appeared to be brushed aside.

I then complained to POPLA specifically asking why this issue had been ignored. Even then, I could not get a proper explanation as to why disputed photographic evidence was apparently accepted without the operator being required to properly answer the allegations made against it.

That is what I find most disturbing about the whole experience.

POPLA presents itself as an independent appeals service, yet from my experience it felt more like a box-ticking exercise where evidence from the parking operator was accepted while a motorist raising serious concerns about that evidence was simply ignored.

I am not asking POPLA to automatically believe me over the parking company. I am asking them to do what an independent appeals service is supposed to do: scrutinise the evidence.

If someone specifically alleges that photographs supplied as evidence are inaccurate, outdated, edited or misleading, how can that simply be ignored?

What is the point of an appeal if the most important part of your argument is not even properly addressed?

This experience has seriously damaged my confidence in POPLA's independence, fairness and competence.

Anyone receiving a private parking charge should take their own dated photographs and videos of the entire car park immediately. Do not assume that photographs subsequently supplied by a parking operator will necessarily show the site exactly as you saw it.

And do not assume that POPLA will thoroughly investigate questionable evidence simply because you have brought it to their attention.

A deeply disappointing appeals process and, in my experience, nowhere near the level of scrutiny I would expect from an organisation deciding whether consumers should be liable for parking charges.

POPLA are a waste of time. I received a Parking Charge for overstaying 10 min while parked in a car park for 3 hrs. I had used that time to setup up payment method and find a parking spot. I appealed to POPLA and they still rejected my case.

Reply to POPLA: what a load of rubbish.

This company is funded and appeals are paid for by the parking enforcement boneheads themselves. It is therefore highly biased in their favour and I doubt if they have ever upheld an appeal from a member of the public. They take a hard line to extract money for their customer who is the parking enforcement operator. Do not bother to appeal. Allow the case to go to court (if ever) and present your evidence before the judge. Parking operators use scare tactics before proceeding with court action (very few cases go to court - it is expensive for the operator and a gamble as they may never get their money back) so do not be alarmed. I have learned from experience so stick to your guns and keep hold of your evidence to present to the judge!

Do not bother appealing to this company. When speaking with them a manger actually called me a liar when trying to explain what happened. Saying he gets fed up hearing weird and wonderful excuses all day.
After nearly three years I had a court date which was thrown out a couple of days before the hearing.
Re - Reply,
Obviously it was not a 'weird and wonderful ' excuse as the courts threw it out.
However it still does not excuse the rudeness of your staff (especially managers).

Despite successfully disputing the only evidence submitted by the car park operator regarding my parking permit notbeing in force, POPLA still sided with Civil Enforcement. The process is definitely not supportive of ordinary people disputing these invoices and does not offer sufficient guidance so it is only when you read the Decision that ypu discover what additional info they are after. My only options now are to pay a fine for parking at work despite being authorised, or go to court. Disgraceful.

I have given POPLA one star for now, although I will happily reconsider that rating if its complaints process results in a proper review.

My appeal was rejected using wording that was not supported by the parking operator’s own evidence. The assessor treated entering the car park as the point at which a contract was formed, while the operator’s documents repeatedly said the terms applied when parking. That distinction was central because the vehicle used the McDonald’s drive through and did not park.

I submitted a formal complaint on 9 July and was told it would be reviewed within 7 to 21 days. I am genuinely disappointed that I have had to use the complaints process at all, as the error should have been obvious from a basic check of the evidence before the decision was issued.

An independent appeals service is only useful if the evidence and its own decisions are properly checked. I hope the complaints team now does that.

***Update following POPLA complaint response***

POPLA have now responded to my complaint, and unfortunately it has only made my concerns worse.

These are the facts as I see them:

The vehicle did not park. It used the McDonald’s drive-through.

Horizon’s own evidence repeatedly framed the contract as applying when parking / by choosing to park / by parking the vehicle.

Their own ANPR evidence only showed the vehicle entering and exiting. It did not show the vehicle parked.

The original POPLA decision treated entry/re-entry to the site as enough, despite my appeal being that this was a parking contract and the vehicle did not park.

I complained that the assessor had used the wrong contractual trigger and had not properly addressed the basis of my appeal.

Rather than properly address that point, POPLA’s complaint response introduced a new argument: that 28 minutes was too long to be on site without being considered parked.

That was not the basis of Horizon’s charge. It was not the basis of Horizon’s rejection. It was not the basis of the original POPLA assessment. It appeared only at complaint stage, after the appeal had already been rejected.

This matters because I had evidence from McDonald’s that the restaurant was very busy that night and that they were short-staffed. If “28 minutes is too long for a drive-through visit” had been part of the case, I could have responded to it properly.

Instead, the goalposts were moved after the event.

Make of that what you will, but from my experience the complaints process did not feel like a proper review. It felt like a way to defend the original decision, even when the actual basis of the appeal had not been properly dealt with.

I am paying the charge only because it is in my daughter’s name and I will not expose her to the stress or risk of court proceedings. Payment does not mean I accept that the charge was fair, properly assessed, or correctly decided.

I can't believe an operation like Popla whoever funds them!! We are told and hope they look at all circumstances but don't see common sense and genuine errors and will only go by the book.. whatever the circumstance, it is pointless sending them the truth.. they are just puppets to the parking companies.. waste of time as they have no empathy for honest mistakes so just pay the fine even if you are innocent. Hopefully the govt will close down this pointless quango and all the beaurocratic staff at Popla and all the appeal assessors will loose their jobs.. maybe they can then go into social care.. but hey they will just starve the innocent bystanders as they have no understanding or empathy!! get rid of Popla waste of time and tax payers money !

he whole ANPR system is a big fraud. This white-collar mafia is taking over the parking system in our country, and everybody is taking their cut: the government, councils, private parking operators, and POPLA. They all get their share.

POPLA is paid by the parking operator for each appeal, something like £30, which ultimately comes out of your PCN, so why wouldn't they favour the parking operator?

They can install cameras anywhere by calling it private land, usually near shopping areas, and innocent motorists drive in good faith without knowing that their vehicles are being recorded (where is privacy and GDPR here). They expect motorists to read small signboards whilst driving, which is impossible and arguably unsafe.

If someone mistakenly ignores the signs, they are slapped with a £100 PCN. To make the whole process appear legitimate, POPLA was established so that drivers don't feel like they are being scammed.

Don't waste your time appealing. Either pay straight away or pay at the end after a court judgment.

When I asked for evidence of land ownership and proof that the operator was acting on behalf of the landowner, they simply used GDPR as an excuse not to provide the evidence, or they produced contracts that appeared to be fake as the ticket was issued in Stevenage and contract said borough council of Basildon. Yet this company could not see that as a problem because they are designed to white wash the claim.

They want you to pay simply by blindly trusting their claims of authority. Meanwhile, the government is watching this system flourish across our parking spaces while drivers continue to be penalised. The DVLA is selling all your records to these mafia companies who can then further sell your records who is watching (Where is GDPR and privacy?). Shame on them too! I have seen this mafia in the UK only other countries are not that infected.

Honestly . Parking Eye and POPLA are a waste of time , nine or more appeals to the scurrilous parking demand in a supermarket carpark for being a few minutes over their proffered time limit , which is not enforceable against two well disabled people .
We'll be happy to go to court on this one .

POPLA are currently dancing to the tune of their greedy, fat-cat paymasters. It’s now time to turn the tables and to change the tune.

Scratch the surface of POPLA and there will doubtless be a lot to see. Someone just needs to go looking to expose POPLA for what it is, a facilitator of this runaway gravy train for (mostly) overseas investors, bleeding UK motorists dry, and which now needs to be stopped. POPLA is so incompetent that you could almost cry with laughter at how biased their assessors are, but this is a serious problem when you consider the unregulated, unchecked power and control that it has over motorists.

I came across ill-educated, shameless, grubby individuals during my appeals process who, in my experience, are paying lip service to independence as they line the pockets of their fat-cat, lying paymasters. I found POPLA to be nothing more than facilitators for this racketeering industry, and who respond to all reviews with meaningless platitudes of ‘regret’, followed by condescending, passive-aggressive, “nothing to see here, it’s all your fault” explanations, and reinforced with deny, deny, deny comments, in an attempt to gaslight their paymasters’ victims. Look at their responses. They use the same standard pattern with slight variations. They must assume that as you were stupid enough to think that they were an independent organisation in the first place, then you must also be stupid enough not to notice that their replies are the same!

I refuse to be a silent victim of POPLA, and don’t bother trying to gaslight and shut me down with your reply of regret, platitudes and denials. It won’t work.

Doubtless rich pickings for investigative / undercover journalists in this rotting heap of manure known as POPLA . Enjoy…!

Didn't overturn or even manage to reduce my fine to £20 after I had mistyped the wrong time into the RingGo app. I paid the same parking amount as I would have done if I had entered the correct time! I thought this company was supposed to help drivers? Feels as though they totally sided with the money-thieving company that is Euro Car Parks. Awful experience. No doubt I'll get some AI-generated reply to this that starts with something along the lines of "I'm sorry you didn't get the outcome you were hoping for..."