Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: PCN from Parking Control Management
FightBack Forums > Queries > Private Parking Tickets & Clamping

I'm new here & I'm not sure how to go about appealing a PCN I received recently. I wondered if anyone could help with sme pointers?

Recently I had to make a one-off visit to a company in a town I've never visited before. The business is located in a large office building which is used by multiple companies. The building is in a cul-de-sac which has a number of marked bays on one side of the road & there is a car park behind the office building with a barrier & fences around.

I parked in one of the marked bays, all of which were empty at the time. I got out of the car & checked all around the bay for notices about parking but there were none. On the opposite side of the road attached to the car park fence was a small sign at a height of approx. 2 feet saying a permit is required to park here. As it was attached to the car park fence I assumed it applied to the car park and I entered the building where I stayed for a couple of hours. When I returned to my car I found I had been given a PCN for parking in a Residents' Only bay without a permit.

On reading this I checked again for signage but the only sign was on the other side of the road. Annoyingly I could have parked in the car park as there were plenty of spaces. I hadn't parked the because of the sign. I parked in the bay in good faith & at no point were the bays full. In fact, for the majority of the time there, I was the only car parked there.

I appealed to the PPC on the above grounds but, unsurprisingly, they rejected it. I have been given a POPLA code (although they didn't tell me it was that. They just put 'Verification Code' at the top of the letter).

I have been given some advice on the Moneysavingexpert forum but I'm not sure how to proceed for here.

I've been given a lot of very helpful advice & links & I've spent many, many hours reading through so many cases. However, I'm very confused. Firstly I was parked in a bay on a road rather than in a car park. Can I still use the argument that the PPC have no right to issue charges?

Can I use the signage as a valid argument? I always check before parking & I strongly feel the signage is unclear, misleading, wrongly positioned & inadequate.

Unfortunately I do not have photos & I can't go back to the area as it is a long way from me.

I can't argue about the loss of revenue as it is not a pay & display car park. Is there any other relevant argument I can use in this case?

Any help would be very gratefully received. I am determined to see this through but I am struggling. I don't expect anyone to write my appeal for me but I genuinely do not know where to start.

Thank you for your help.
Instead pf people spending more of their tome giving advice. Follow the advice given on mse!

I can't believe u hve spent many hours reading about this.....
I have - I've spent about 10 hours so far. I have been given many links to read which I have done.

I've not been in this situation before and admit that I am completely ignorant of the laws. I am yet to find one single case that is the same as mine. They are nearly all about pay & display car parks or retail centre car parks. My situation is slightly different in that I parked on a road.

I'm not sure what legislation applies in this case & I was just asking for a bit of guidance. If nobody can help me the fair enough. I will continue to follow advice on mse & formulate an appeal which hopefully somebody can look over for me. I apologise if anyone feels I am wasting their time but I have put in the research as requested & it was suggested that I post on this forum. I am sorry if that offends anyone.
Your situation is no different. Where u parked is irrelevent with popla.

That's the problem people don't understand they don't need *a similiar case*
Ok thanks very much. It is confusing if you don't know the law & are new to this. It just needs helpful advice from someone like yourself to confirm this.

Thanks for your input.
There are some good POPLA appeals on this website, but you may have to search a little.

Its a shame you don't have photos of the lack of signs, but do use this as one of your appeal points anyway - the PPC has to prove there was sufficient signage - its not unknown for them to go back and either 'doctor' the site or the pictures but anyway... The lack of signage means that no contract could be formed with the driver, and hence there was no contract to breach.

You also need to appeal and state that you do not believe that the PPC has the necessary contractual clauses in the contract with the landowner to allow them to offer a service of parking and hence pursue the driver or registered keeper for any breach.

It is also worth looking at the paperwork they have sent you to see how compliant it is with the Protetction of Freedoms Act 2012, there is also a link to a checklist on here, which sits on the Parking Cowboys website I think. Again, have a trawl on here for it. It's in a lot of threads.

A good POPLA appeal should sink this.
Thanks ManxRed. I have had a lot of help on the mse forums & I spent most of the weekends reading the BPA Code of Practice, the Protection of Freedoms Act & numerous previous appeals.

I have now submitted my appeal on the following points:

1) Insufficient signage. There are no signs n entry to the road which is a breach of the BPA Code. Also, the only signs present are on the opposite side of the road & are fixed to a private car park fence. The signs do not specify anything about the parking bays - they just say you need a permit to park 'in this area'. There is no way of knowing if they refer to the parking bays or the car park. The signs are tiny & are below waist height. They are impossible to read from a car.

2) Lack of contract.

3) Incorrect Notice to Driver. They didn't identify the creditor & they failed to correctly name where the offence took place. In all correspondence they have mis-spelt the road name.

4) No breach of contract & no genuine per-estimate of cost.

5) Unlawful penalty charge.

I'll let you know how I get on.
they are just the heads and there was more extensive text (which argue for the points) ? ?
Yes Bama, those are just the headings. The actual full appeal goes into a lot of detail. I just didn't want to print it in full on here. I have written the full text on the mse forums as I have had a lot of help there & wanted someone to look over it first.
Just to let you all know, my appeal was successful.

I won because Parking Control Management failed to prove that the parking charge was a genuine pre-estimate of loss.

Keep fighting them everyone!
well done
can you post up the adjudication ?
can you post up the adjudication assessment ?

fixed that for ya
True , ( I'm used to pretending it's more important than it is )
Means to an end 😉
Just received the POPLA decision on my appeal against Parking Control Management. This is yet another case where the operator lost because they could not prove it was a genuine pre-estimate of loss:

The Operator issued parking charge notice number xxxxxxxx arising out of the presence at xxxxxxx, on xxxxxxx, of a vehicle with registration mark xxxxxxx for parking without displaying a valid permit.

It is the Operator's case that the Appellant's vehicle was parked without displaying a valid permit and this was a breach of the terms and conditions of parking as set out on signage at the site.

The Appellant has made a number of submissions, however, I will only elaborate on the one submission that I am allowing this appeal on, namely that the parking charge amount is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss.

The signage produced by the Operator states a failure to comply with the terms and conditions will lead to a charge of £100 being issued. This wording seems to indicate that the charge represents damages for a breach of the parking contract and therefore the charge must be a genuine pre-estimate of loss.

As the Appellant has raised the issue of the charge not being a genuine pre-estimate of loss, the onus is on the Operator to prove that it is. The Operator has produced a breakdown of costs that they incur in managing the car park, however this is a general list of operational costs and does not address the loss that was caused by the Appellant's breach of the terms and conditions of parking.

I have looked at all of the evidence and have decided to allow this appeal on the basis that the Operator has failed to prove that the parking charge amount was a genuine pre-estimate of loss.

Accordingly this appeal must be allowed.

Noir Uddin
Nice result! I think you have put this up on the MSE POPLA decisions sticky thread already, for posterity.

I am noticing a lot of new names of assessors at POPLA, all pretty much singing from the same hymn sheet which is good.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2020 Invision Power Services, Inc.