P4 Parking PCN

[damn-this-pcn]

Hi,

The driver was parked in residential area on Sunday 13th July 2025
on returning to vehicle, driver noticed they had been given a PCN.
Attached is picture of PCN and the signage - which driver did not notice at time of parking.

Should driver pay fine or appeal?

Thank you in advance for advice and help,

[des8]

I would await the Notice to Keeper (NTK) to see if they make errors

The "Time of issue" (18.24) is suspiciously the same as "the Period of parking to" (18.24)
I cannot make out the "Period of parking from" but it seems to end (??.24)

To transfer liability for the parking charge from the driver to the keeper, the NTK must specify a period.
The sign has no warning about the use of ANPR cameras, so I wonder how they will specify a period.

How prominent are the signs? viewable from the position where vehicle was parked?

I would just wait

[damn-this-pcn]

Hi, Thank you for your response.
The print on PCN is faded but the Issue Time, Period of Parking From and Period of Parking To all state 18:24.
Photos will be taken over weekend to show how prominent signs are - these will be posted up.

In meantime, Keeper will wait until NTK arrives.

[diecastdave]

I would await the Notice to Keeper (NTK) to see if they make errors

The "Time of issue" (18.24) is suspiciously the same as "the Period of parking to" (18.24)
I cannot make out the "Period of parking from" but it seems to end (??.24)

To transfer liability for the parking charge from the driver to the keeper, the NTK must specify a period.
The sign has no warning about the use of ANPR cameras, so I wonder how they will specify a period.

How prominent are the signs? viewable from the position where vehicle was parked?

I would just wait

Hi

I had a pcn in the post from UKPS Limited dated 10/06/2025 issued to my vehicle which was parked on private land at 14:42
Was this the entry time or the exit time.
There are no date and time stamp on the 2 photos. P1. vehicle entering. P2. vehicle exiting. The time 14:42 is not on the 2 photos. I appealed to UKPS ltd, not surprisingly, it was rejected. I then requested the signed document from the landowner granting UKPS ltd to use the land and giving the start and end time of the permission and the signed documented where UKPS ltd have accepted the permission.
I requested a copy of the maintenance and repair certificate for the ANPR/CCTV signed and dated which has to be carried out at least once a year. My request has been ignored suggesting they are acting illegally. UKPS ltd will not enter into any further correspondence unless I pay the fine/pcn. I wrote to them last week offering them to look at the IPC (page 15 if I remember) because it states that all pcn's posted should be date and time stamped. I told them I am not paying their illegal document and I look forward to seeing them in court. I haven't had a reply yet. No date/time stamp. No car park name on entry/exit board suggests wrong location or Vague Locus. That could be anywhere in the UK. No replies to my requests.
There is another sign affixed to a post which I think may belong to the local council.
BBC and ITV local news have covered a story about the land. The most recent I think was April. I contacted BBC local news showing the pcn and all documents that I have. I'm waiting for a final (3rd) reply. I'm also waiting for a reply from the local council to confirm whether they gave the landowner permission to use the land as a car park. I'll keep you all posted.

OH! one tactic that private car parkers mention is the Parking Eye v Beavis case. In the Supreme Court, Judge Nuremberger (1 of 5 sitting) said each case is judged on it's own merits.

[des8]

diecastdave Not sure if you are posting as a comment on Damn-this-pcn's thread or looking for help.
If the latter please start your own thread

[diecastdave]

diecastdave Not sure if you are posting as a comment on Damn-this-pcn's thread or looking for help.
If the latter please start your own thread

Sorry for the confusion DES8 I thought I had started my own thread until I saw your message. Thank you for your information. No further action is being taken against me.

[des8]

diecastdave well done anyway

[damn-this-pcn]

Hi, The keeper received NTK - please see attached, also uploaded are pictures showing the signage.

Any advice on next steps will be gratefully received,

Thank you

[des8]

You could start your dispute with a letter along the following lines
They probably won't accept your rejection, so if you hear further, just post up here

Do not identify the driver

I have just received your Notice to Keeper xxxxx for vehicle VRM xxxx

You have failed to comply with the requirements of Schedule 4 of The Protection Of Freedoms Act 2012 namely, but not limited to,(i) failing to deliver the notice within the relevant period of 14 days as prescribed by section 8 (5) of the Act.and (ii) failing to specify the period of parking to which this notice applies as prescribed by section 8 (2) (a) of the Act.

You cannot, therefore, transfer liability for the alleged charge from the driver at the time to me, the keeper.

There is no legal requirement to name the driver at the time and I will not be doing so.

Any further communication with me on this matter, apart from confirmation of no further action and my details being removed from your records, will be considered vexatious and harassment. This includes communication from any Debt Collection companies you care to instruct.

Yours etc

send first class post with free certificate of posting from a post office

[damn-this-pcn]

Thank you des8 , the keeper will send dispute letter using template you kindly provided.
Update to follow in due course

[damn-this-pcn]

Hi, the Keeper received the attached response - as expected appeal letter was rejected. If you can help further please with second appeal to POPLA? many thanks

[des8]

That is a template response from the parking company, which does not address your points.
I doubt they even read your letter, as there was a deliberate error within it which they should have picked up.

Anyway I'll get a POPLA appeal sorted in the next few days

[damn-this-pcn]

Hi des8 , just quick message to see how you are getting on with the POPLA Appeal please? Thank you

[des8]

Sorry... you slipped through the net
Doing it now and will post up later this evening as it must be in by tomorrow

[des8]

Here you go
Please read and check it
It may or may not work .. depends on which assessor you get!


"APPEAL RE: PPC Name CHARGE ******/******,*********
, VEHICLE REG: **** ***

I am the registered Keeper of the above vehicle and I am appealing against above charge. I contend that I am not liable for the parking charge on the following grounds and would ask that they are all considered.

1, The driver of the vehicle has not been identified, so only the keeper can be held liable for any unpaid parking charges.
No inferences may be drawn from the refusal to identify the driver


2.. The signage was not compliant with the British Parking Association standards and there was no valid contract between the parking company and the driver.
Following receipt of the charge, I have visited the site in question. I believe the signs and any core parking terms that the parking company are relying upon were too high and too small for any driver to see, read or understand when driving into this area. The Operator needs to show evidence and signage map/photos on this point - specifically showing the height of the signs, font size and where they are at the entrance, whether a driver still in a car can see and read them when deciding to drive in. The terms of
the contract which must be shown in full at the entrance to the area.. I believe the signs failed to properly and clearly warn/inform the driver of the terms in this car park as
they failed to comply with the Private parking Sector Single Code of Practice Section 3 signs and surface markings.
There is no strikingly obvious surface delineation of where the private land begins and the public road ends, and the signs are not conveniently placed for drivers viewing.
Also within the private area the roads are not clearly different to public roads. This means the lack of yellow lines does not bring to the drivers attention that parking is
forbidden, and so the driver does not look for signs regarding parking restrictions
As a POPLA assessor has said previously in an adjudication
“Once an Appellant submits that the terms of parking were not displayed clearly enough, the onus is then on the Operator to demonstrate that the signs at the time and
location in question were sufficiently clear”. and so I require the operator to provide evidence that proves otherwise.

The parking company needs to prove that the driver actually saw, read and accepted the terms, which means that I and the POPLA adjudicator would be led to believe that a conscious decision was made by the driver to park in exchange for paying the extortionate fixed amount the Operator is now demanding, rather than simply the nominal
amount presumably due in a machine on site.

The idea that any driver would accept these terms knowingly is perverse and beyond credibility.

3. The signs are prohibitive in nature "NO PARKING ZONE"
It is trite law that one cannot contract to do what is forbidden, so it must be inferred that the charge is a Penalty Charge, and not a contractual parking charge.
As the charge is not a contractual parking charge it would not be covered by the provisions of Protection of Freedoms Act 2012(POFA2012),Schedule 4 which is for
"Recovery of unpaid parking charges"
In any event, as per point 2. the idea that any driver would accept these terms knowingly is perverse and beyond credibility.

4.Section 56 together with Schedule 4 POFA2012 provides landowners with powers to manage parking on their land.
Paragraph 4 of Schedule 4 of POFA stipulates that the liability for an unpaid parking charge may only be transferred from the driver to the registered keeper of the vehicle if certain conditions as prescribed in Schedule 4 are met.
i) the claimant needs to provide evidence establishing that he has authority to manage and enforce the car park by way of issuing parking charge notices pursuant to condition 5(1)(a) of POFA 2012;
ii)Condition 9 (2) (d) requires the Notice to Keeper "specify the total amount of those parking charges that are unpaid, as at a time which is—
(i)specified in the notice;"
However according to the signs the alleged unpaid "parking" charge was £100, and yet the claimant is now seeking £125 without explanation or specification on how that
figure arises.
iii)Condition 9 (1) (a) states "The notice must ..... specify .... the period of parking to which the notice relates;"
The NTK does not specify a period of parking, but a single point of time and omits the duration.

For all the above reasons I do not believe The Parking Company can transfer liability for any unpaid parking charges to me, the keeper