Require advice for parking ticket issued during parking management handover

[DH2290]

On March 1st 2021 Parking Control Management (PCM) took over management of the residential car park where I live. My car was already parked in my space with a valid UKPC permit from the old provider for about 3 or 4 days and I was not displaying a new PCM permit due to being unaware of the switch. On March 2nd, I went to the car park to find a ticket on my windscreen.

I immediately went to my post-box to find my new permit and contacted PCM to explain this. I supplied evidence of the new permit attached to my car windscreen along with proof that I am authorised to use that space and explained that I didn't know the switch was happening.

My initial appeal was rejected and I was told I could appeal to the IAS. I appealed to the IAS, who wrote a rather cryptic reply to me which kept stating that they have to reject my appeal on legal grounds that I wasn't displaying a correct permit and the charge is 'based in contract'. It's worth noting that I never entered this car park and saw their signage. They switched the signage whilst my car was already parked there and gave me a ticket.

I have now been passed to a debt recovery agency TRACE who are charging me £160.

I would like some advice on the following if possible:

1. If you are legally parked in a car park and a company switches the signs & ownership overnight without your knowledge, have you still 'made a contract' with them? Is there grounds to legally object here?

2. Is it legal for PCM to automatically increase your parking fine from £60 to £100 just for making an appeal to the IAS? Is this not legally considered as a form of threat/blackmail to force people to pay the initial charge?

3. I am being asked to pay £160 to TRACE within 14 days before more debt is added and it is escalated. Is there anything I can do to prevent this or gain additional time from them?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

[ostell]

So who owns the space you are using? Is it allocated to you in your lease?

If they changed the signs while you were not present then you could not have read them to create a contract

The Charge is £100 discounted to £60 if paid early. Yes it's blackmail to persuade people to pay.

The extra £60 that has now appeared was disallowed in the Beavis case as the court of appeal adjudged the initial charge was sufficient

[DH2290]

Thanks for your reply.

I'm renting an apartment in a residential block which has sole use of a numbered parking bay. I'm given a permit by whoever the management company which needs to be in the windscreen.

Reading the judgement from IAS (as a layperson), it looks like the main points are:

1) prior warning was given through correspondence delivered to my mailbox
2) signage in the carpark was adequate
3) my car was not displaying the permit.

My counter arguments in this are the following:

1) I am a legal tenant of the property and I was parked in my allocated space. My windshield was displaying the old permit so it was obvious that I was a tenant. PCM issued the fine on the very first day that the switchover happened (switch took place on 1 Mar, fine issued 2 Mar) which is opportunistic and designed to catch out tenants that hadn't switched the permits on the windshield.

2) I did not enter the carpark until 3 March, so I could not have seen the new signage displayed in the carpark until then. This can verified by cctv if they wish to go through the footage.

3) Although they delivered the notice and permit to my mailbox (they have bodycam footage of this), can I be said to have entered a contract with the new parking company based on this?

The adjudicator wrote that 'Having considered the evidence provided I am satisfied that the Operator has the authority to issue and enforce PCNs at this location and that the Appellant was made adequately aware of this fact prior to the charge being issued'.

Can it be really be proven that I was 'made adequately aware of this fact prior to the charge being issued'?

I also found it interesting that the adjudicator wrote this: 'The terms of this appeal are that I am only allowed to consider the charge being appealed and not the circumstances of other drivers or other parking events. The guidance to this appeal also makes it clear that I am bound by the law of contract and can only consider legal challenges not mistakes or extenuating circumstances'.

Is it fair that extenuating circumstances are not taken into account when making this judgment?

I'm just wondering what the best course of action is right now. Should I be looking for legal representation for this case and how should I deal with debt collectors at this stage? I understand advice taken here is my own decision to act on.

[ostell]

The IAS will reject out of hand anyway. So your lease says that you have use of space xxx. Perhaps contact your landlord, explain the situation and ask him politely on what basis is he giving you the rights to the parking space. Is it demised to him in his lease etc.

So you already have a contract to park in that space and have no need of another contract to park in that space. Any permits are displayed to ease the work of their operatives in identifying strangers with no intention of creating a contract.

[DH2290]

The IAS will reject out of hand anyway. So your lease says that you have use of space xxx. Perhaps contact your landlord, explain the situation and ask him politely on what basis is he giving you the rights to the parking space. Is it demised to him in his lease etc.

Have done this now and waiting to hear back from my landlord. I'll let you know what comes back. Unfortunately the only mention of parking spaces in my rental contract is that permits must be returned for my deposit to be refunded. It's not mentioned in the main body of the contract at all.

So you already have a contract to park in that space and have no need of another contract to park in that space. Any permits are displayed to ease the work of their operatives in identifying strangers with no intention of creating a contract.

Appreciate your help in wording this.

[ostell]

What do the signs say?

[DH2290]

Sorry for the long gap between last post - Have been stalling for time as much as possible with little to report.

Signage uploaded as photo.

I managed to get an email from my estate agent confirming that the parking space is provided with the renting of my apartment. There was nothing more than that provided to me but I hope that would still be sufficient to show that I have the sole right to use the space.

I have had numerous issues with the debt collectors recently. I replied to their final demand email with the following:

'I believe that the invoice which has been issued to me is without correct legal basis and I will be appealing this charge. Please can you tell me what I need to do from this point in order to make this appeal?'

On the 20th July, I have received a letter from TRACE stating:

'Please be advised that the hold has been removed, as previously advised ‘We will be unable to enter into any further correspondence regarding this matter’. Your next opportunity to appeal is the county court.'

Strangely, after this they have still continued to send me emails & texts asking for payment. Why are they still communicating with me after they say they don't want any more correspondence?

What should I do from here, is it best to ignore them now?

[ostell]

There is nothing much more you can do. They have realised that the threat of court has not resulted in payment.

Basically you already have a contract to park from your landlord and you have no need of another contract.

Might cost you a small sum but might be worth looking at the land registry and seeing if you can download a copy of your landlords lease. See what it says about parking and the parking spot.