DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 111364--------------------------------------------------
PPS - PCN - Serving Defendant with DQ
DIR By: edico
Date: February 27, 2026, 8:33 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I am seeking advice regarding a parking ticket matter that has
now progressed to a court claim.
The original ticket was issued on a street where parking is
restricted on one side only, with signage posted on that side.
There was no clear indication that the restriction applied to
both sides of the street. I parked on the opposite side of the
road, where there was no visible sign prohibiting parking, also
to mention, I was not the only one doing that. Despite this, I
received a parking ticket.
After receiving a claim form, I submitted a response. I have now
received further correspondence from the Claimant’s solicitors
stating that they have filed a Directions Questionnaire with the
Court and intend to proceed with the claim. They have indicated
willingness to mediate and are asking whether I agree to
mediation. They have also asked whether I am willing to accept
service of further documents by email.
Additionally, they have provided an evidence pack.
I am unsure how to proceed at this stage and would appreciate
your advice on the following:
Whether I should agree to mediation.
Whether accepting service by email is advisable.
The strength of my position given the signage situation.
What steps I should take next to protect my position.
Thank you in advance for your assistance.
Kind regards,
HTML https://postimg.cc/gallery/BJJZ7Ws
My response was:
I wish to challenge the above PCN on the basis that the alleged
contravention did not occur.
I parked on the opposite side of the road to where signage
indicating a restriction was present. On the side where my
vehicle was parked, there were no road markings and no upright
signs indicating that parking was prohibited.
Under Regulation 18 of the Local Authorities’ Traffic Orders
(Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996, a traffic
authority has a duty to ensure that the effect of a traffic
order is adequately conveyed to road users.
Further, under the Traffic Signs Regulations and General
Directions 2016, restrictions must be indicated by prescribed
signs and/or road markings.
As there were no signs or markings on the side where I parked,
the restriction was not adequately conveyed. A motorist cannot
reasonably be expected to infer that a restriction applies where
it is not clearly indicated.
In the circumstances, the alleged contravention did not occur
and I request that the PCN be cancelled.
So after this I received N180 form with pictures and previous
parking notices
#Post#: 111366--------------------------------------------------
Re: PPS - PCN - Serving Defendant with DQ
DIR By: jfollows
Date: February 27, 2026, 8:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
You should have receive a N1SDT county court claim form, with a
claim number and password, giving you deadlines in which to
respond and explaining that mediation is mandatory.
Do you have this?
If so, please post but remove personal details including
passwords.
--- Quote ---
> After receiving a claim form, I submitted a response.
--- End Quote ---
What was your response?
If you have used MCOL then check your status. You need to submit
your own N180/DQ when it tells you.
#Post#: 111373--------------------------------------------------
Re: PPS - PCN - Serving Defendant with DQ
DIR By: edico
Date: February 27, 2026, 9:01 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I updated - many thanks
#Post#: 111456--------------------------------------------------
Re: PPS - PCN - Serving Defendant with DQ
DIR By: jfollows
Date: February 28, 2026, 2:53 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Search the forum for “N180” to find suggestions for a subset of
the answers required when you need to complete your own.
#Post#: 111473--------------------------------------------------
Re: PPS - PCN - Serving Defendant with DQ
DIR By: Dave65
Date: February 28, 2026, 4:50 am
---------------------------------------------------------
It would be nice to see the original PPN.
Also, unfortunately you have identified the driver.
But, I`m sure PPS was one of the PPC`s that eventually
discontinue their claim.
Below is a post by b789 from last year.
Not to worry. You are just one of literally thousands who have
been suckered into this well know scam at this location. If you
follow the advice, you won't be paying a penny to PPS.
There are several things wrong with the Parking Charge Notice
(PCN) that has been issued as a postal Notice to Keeper (NtK).
The first one is that it is not fully compliant with all the
requirements of PoFA to be able to hold the Keeper liable for
the charge. PPS have absolutely no idea who the driver is unless
the Keeper blabs it to them, inadvertently or otherwise.
The Keeper and the driver are two separate legal entities and
there is no legal obligation on the Keeper to identify the drie
third person. No "I did this or that". Only "The driver did this
or that". So, don't tell 'em your name Pike!
Also, the location is NOT Holloway Street but Mattise Road. I
have seen PPS provide doctored maps to POPLA to try and con them
about this issue.
For now, as PPS will reject any initial appeal, just send the
following and wait for the rejection and the POPLA code.
Easy one to deal with… as long as the unknown drivers identity
is not revealed. There is no legal obligation on the known
keeper (the recipient of the Notice to Keeper (NtK)) to reveal
the identity of the unknown driver and no inference or
assumptions can be made.
The NtK is not compliant with all the requirements of PoFA which
means that if the unknown driver is not identified, they cannot
transfer liability for the charge from the unknown driver to the
known keeper.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1