DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 116546--------------------------------------------------
PPS PARKING CHARGE - didnt even recieve the first letter!
DIR By: da3533
Date: April 21, 2026, 6:41 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hello
I got a PPS notice to keeper charge. it says its overdue too. i
never recieved the first letter! see attached...
shall i appeal?
see below of images of the letter i received:
HTML https://i.ibb.co/NgQSJY8J/IMG-3801.jpg
HTML https://ibb.co/p6GyMXtM
HTML https://i.ibb.co/jZWBVQ6p/IMG-3800.jpg
HTML https://ibb.co/BKrd4Qz1
ALSO i remember this day, i went to get my passport renewed from
the passport office. there were roadworks on entry... there was
a sign i found on google street view. it says 'NO PARKING ON RED
ROUTE' SEE ATTACHED.
i never parked on the red route. it was no red route with a
disable badge. there was a shipment container blocker the exit
of a building, which covered that signage on streetview where
the container was, i parked along side the container. see images
attached.
HTML https://i.ibb.co/Ldzpt6VF/Screenshot-2026-04-21-123815.png
HTML https://ibb.co/TMBh8R9f
HTML https://i.ibb.co/zVBDSMhm/IMG-2917.jpg
HTML https://ibb.co/whPjKkNd
HTML https://i.ibb.co/JRqbjk03/Screenshot-2026-04-21-125405.png
HTML https://ibb.co/KjDQxyRK
#Post#: 116645--------------------------------------------------
Re: PPS PARKING CHARGE - didnt even recieve the first letter!
DIR By: da3533
Date: April 22, 2026, 3:48 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Any suggestions?
Thanks
#Post#: 116653--------------------------------------------------
Re: PPS PARKING CHARGE - didnt even recieve the first letter!
DIR By: Dave65
Date: April 22, 2026, 4:26 am
---------------------------------------------------------
One angle here is that Royal Victoria Dock may well be covered
by bylaws and is not private land.
Regulars will advise.
#Post#: 116654--------------------------------------------------
Re: PPS PARKING CHARGE - didnt even recieve the first letter!
DIR By: jfollows
Date: April 22, 2026, 4:39 am
---------------------------------------------------------
See
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/pcn-pps-royal-victoria-docks-e16/15/
--- Quote ---
> And today the FoI request was answered with a ton of documents
which basically show that the location is not private land,
which is why PPS have gone scuttling off.
>
> If you want the FoI info so that you can now sue PPS for their
unlawful breach of your GDPR and to also get back at them with a
formal DVLA complaint that could see them suspended from the
KADOE contract, then PM me with an email address I can forward
it to.
--- End Quote ---
Unfortunately b789 isn’t around here any more.
#Post#: 116655--------------------------------------------------
Re: PPS PARKING CHARGE - didnt even recieve the first letter!
DIR By: da3533
Date: April 22, 2026, 4:49 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for your replies.
I have drafted an appeal:
I am the registered keeper of the vehicle and I dispute this
Parking Charge in full.
This is the first correspondence I have received regarding this
matter and this is my first opportunity to respond. No prior
Notice to Keeper was received within the required timeframe. As
such, I was not given a fair opportunity to respond or appeal at
the appropriate stage. In the absence of a properly served and
compliant Notice to Keeper in accordance with Schedule 4 of the
Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, you cannot transfer liability
to the registered keeper.
Further to this, I dispute the charge on the following grounds:
1. The vehicle was not parked on any red route
The allegation refers to “Parking in a No Parking area” and
relies on signage stating “No Parking on Red Routes”. The
vehicle was not parked on any red route. There were no double
red lines or any standard road markings indicating a red route
at the position where the vehicle was parked.
The vehicle was positioned on a separate block-paved area
adjacent to the building frontage, outside what appears to be a
loading/service entrance. This area is visually and physically
distinct from the main carriageway and from any red route
markings, which are located further away on the actual roadway.
As such, the restriction stated on the sign does not apply to
the location where the vehicle was parked.
2. The area is not clearly defined as restricted
There are no clear boundary markings, signage, or physical
indicators to define the area where the vehicle was parked as
part of any restricted zone. The block-paved area gives the
clear impression of a separate space, such as a loading bay or
frontage area, rather than part of a controlled red route.
A reasonable driver would not interpret this area as being
subject to the same restrictions as the red-lined roadway. The
lack of clarity and definition fails to meet the requirements of
the BPA Code of Practice.
3. Inadequate, misleading, and non-contractual signage
The signage relied upon states “No Parking on Red Routes”, which
is prohibitive in nature and does not offer parking under any
contractual terms. It does not clearly state that parking is
prohibited in the specific area where the vehicle was
positioned, nor does it clearly display any parking charge at
the point of parking.
Such signage is incapable of forming a legally binding contract.
In addition, any signage positioned elsewhere (including on the
opposite side of the road) is not sufficient to communicate
terms to a driver parked in a separate area, particularly where
it is not within a clear line of sight.
4. Signage was obstructed and not visible at the time
At the time of parking, site conditions were materially
different due to roadworks and temporary obstructions.
A large beige shipping container was positioned directly in
front of the building, occupying the area where signage would
ordinarily be visible. This container obstructed the line of
sight to any signage in that location.
Additionally, a pallet of drink boxes was positioned to the
right of the container, further obstructing visibility and
altering the layout of the area.
The vehicle was parked alongside this container, in a position
that appeared separate from the carriageway and outside any
marked red route. Due to these obstructions, no signage was
visible, readable, or capable of being understood prior to
parking.
Any signage visible on historical imagery (such as Google Street
View) was not visible at the time due to these temporary
obstructions. This fails the requirement for clear, prominent,
and visible signage as required by the BPA Code of Practice.
5. No clear evidence of contravention
Given the absence of red route markings at the parking position,
the unclear boundaries of the area, and the obstructed signage,
it is not evident that any contravention has occurred. The
burden of proof rests with the operator to demonstrate that the
vehicle was parked in a clearly restricted area with adequate
and visible signage, which is denied.
6. Land status and lack of proof of authority
It is unclear whether the land in question constitutes “relevant
land” for the purposes of Schedule 4 of the Protection of
Freedoms Act 2012.
I understand that areas around Royal Victoria Docks may be
subject to statutory control or byelaws. If this is the case,
then the land would not be “relevant land”, and you would be
unable to rely on keeper liability under POFA.
You are therefore required to provide strict proof that:
- The land is relevant land as defined under Schedule 4 of POFA
- You have full authority from the landowner to issue and
enforce parking charges at this location
I am under no obligation to identify the driver and will not be
doing so.
For all of the reasons stated above, I require that this charge
is cancelled. Alternatively, please provide a POPLA verification
code so that I may escalate the matter.
#Post#: 116659--------------------------------------------------
Re: PPS PARKING CHARGE - didnt even recieve the first letter!
DIR By: RichardW
Date: April 22, 2026, 5:03 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Are there photos on their website? The dates and wording suggest
a screen PCN may have been served. Doesn't make much difference
to the appeal, but may change one of your paras.
#Post#: 116663--------------------------------------------------
Re: PPS PARKING CHARGE - didnt even recieve the first letter!
DIR By: da3533
Date: April 22, 2026, 5:10 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: RichardW link ---
>
> Are there photos on their website? The dates and wording
suggest a screen PCN may have been served. Doesn't make much
difference to the appeal, but may change one of your paras.
>
--- End Quote ---
Yes, just found it by entering the ref.. see below... (im in the
Grey Qashqai) i didnt see that signage on the left. there is a
signage behind the container. the container was blocking all
views. it was on red route so i waited there right beside the
container..
HTML https://i.ibb.co/cXTH6WfS/Screenshot-2026-04-22-110702.png
HTML https://ibb.co/6JsxHK97
#Post#: 116664--------------------------------------------------
Re: PPS PARKING CHARGE - didnt even recieve the first letter!
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: April 22, 2026, 5:12 am
---------------------------------------------------------
In the absence of b789 you could see whether the relevant
authority has published the FOI response, and if not, submit
your own request.
In addition to the relevant land argument, in struggling to see
what contractual offer to park is communicated by a sign that
says "No parking at any time".
#Post#: 116666--------------------------------------------------
Re: PPS PARKING CHARGE - didnt even recieve the first letter!
DIR By: da3533
Date: April 22, 2026, 5:19 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: DWMB2 link ---
>
> In the absence of b789 you could see whether the relevant
authority has published the FOI response, and if not, submit
your own request.
>
> In addition to the relevant land argument, in struggling to
see what contractual offer to park is communicated by a sign
that says "No parking at any time".
>
--- End Quote ---
they had this sign.
HTML https://i.ibb.co/kVVCXhQx/Screenshot-2026-04-22-111407.png
HTML https://imgbb.com/
ive added this to my draft:
While I note that there is a sign positioned on the wall behind
the location where the vehicle was parked, this sign was not
visible at any point prior to parking.
Due to the layout of the road being a dead-end, the vehicle was
required to turn before reaching the position of the container.
I turned before the container and parked immediately alongside
it. As a result, the sign located behind the container was
completely out of view and could not be seen at all prior to or
at the time of parking.
The sign would only become visible after completing a manoeuvre
such as reversing or turning 180 degrees after already parking,
which is not sufficient for the purposes of forming a contract.
Additionally, the presence of a large beige shipping container
and a pallet of drink boxes further obstructed any possible line
of sight to the signage.
For a parking charge to be enforceable, the terms must be
clearly visible and capable of being read before the driver
makes the decision to park. In this case, the signage was not
visible at all at the material time, and therefore no contract
could have been formed.
#Post#: 116670--------------------------------------------------
Re: PPS PARKING CHARGE - didnt even recieve the first letter!
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: April 22, 2026, 6:00 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Given one of your arguments is that they cannot hold you liable
as the keeper using PoFA it would be very unwise to identify the
driver, which your proposed additional wording would do.
My previous point also still stands - what offer to park is
communicated by that sign?
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1