DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 116547--------------------------------------------------
PCN for re-entering a LIDL & pure gym car park - Letter from
ELMS Legal
DIR By: K12345678
Date: April 21, 2026, 6:57 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi,
In October I received a parking ticket for re-entering a LIDL
and Pure Gym car park. I went to pure gym for an hour then left,
then came back 30 mins later and was at LIDL for 9 mins. Max
stay in car park was 2 hours but with a no re-entering clause.
I ignored all their letters from them to pay a fine and from
DCBL but have now got a letter from a Elms Legal saying that I
have to pay them by the 24th Apr or they will commence with
legal proceedings.
I replied to that with an email disputing the charge and
disputing the reason for the charge - which they have since come
back to me with this:
"Regardless of the reasoning you were at the site or were
returning, there is a no return within 1 hour as is very clearly
stated on the signage. Our client is a member of the
International Parking Community and has to abide by their rules
for signage, a copy is attached of the sign.
This is not cancelled and remains open and outstanding at the
£170.00.
I have held the case for 30 days to allow you to consider your
options of either paying the £170.00 in full or instalments or
waiting for the claim to be issued through the courts so that
you can submit a defence."
What do I do or say from here?
#Post#: 116550--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for re-entering a LIDL & pure gym car park - Letter
from ELMS Legal
DIR By: InterCity125
Date: April 21, 2026, 7:17 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Just for clarity, did you admit to being the driver in your
letter?
#Post#: 116556--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for re-entering a LIDL & pure gym car park - Letter
from ELMS Legal
DIR By: K12345678
Date: April 21, 2026, 7:34 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Yes I did
#Post#: 116558--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for re-entering a LIDL & pure gym car park - Letter
from ELMS Legal
DIR By: Sander333
Date: April 21, 2026, 7:34 am
---------------------------------------------------------
As has been said if you have disclosed who the driver was you
have made this issue a lot more complex.
Still worth posting PCN and signs to see what can be done. If
you have appealed have you copies of what you submiited.
#Post#: 116559--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for re-entering a LIDL & pure gym car park - Letter
from ELMS Legal
DIR By: K12345678
Date: April 21, 2026, 7:39 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Yes this is what I submitted:
To Elms Legal,
I am writing to formally dispute the Parking Charge Notice
issued by Excel Parking Services, in respect of which you have
been instructed to act as debt collector. I categorically
dispute this charge and set out my full grounds below.
I request that this letter is passed to Excel Parking Services
immediately, as they are the issuing party and the only party
with authority to cancel this charge.
Background
On the date in question, I visited the car park as a genuine,
paying customer on two separate occasions:
1. First, to use Pure Gym for approximately one hour.
2. Following a period away from the car park of approximately
thirty minutes, I returned to use Lidl, remaining for under ten
minutes.
My total cumulative time within the car park across both visits
was significantly under the permitted two-hour maximum. I also
departed the car park well before the two-hour limit from my
initial entry would have elapsed. At all times I was an active,
bona fide customer of businesses located within or directly
served by this car park.
Grounds for Dispute
1. Total stay within permitted limits. The charge has been
issued solely on the basis of the no re-entry condition, not
because I exceeded the maximum permitted stay. My overall
presence in the car park was well within the two-hour limit. The
purpose of a maximum stay policy is to prevent a vehicle from
monopolising a space for an unreasonable period — something that
did not occur in this case.
2. Legitimate customer throughout. I was a paying customer of
businesses in the car park on both visits. Enforcing this charge
penalises exactly the type of customer the car park exists to
serve, and is contrary to the reasonable expectations of those
businesses and their customers.
3. Disproportionate charge. The Supreme Court ruling in
ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 established that a
parking charge must represent a legitimate interest and must not
be disproportionate. In this instance, given that my total stay
was within the permitted maximum and I was a genuine customer
throughout, this charge serves no legitimate purpose and is
wholly disproportionate.
4. Signage. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and the
BPA/IPC Code of Practice, parking operators are required to
ensure that all terms, including any no re-entry condition, are
displayed on signage that is clear, prominent, and unambiguous.
I formally request that Excel Parking Services provide evidence
that the no re-entry signage met these requirements and was
clearly visible upon entry to the car park.
Formal Request
I formally request that this Parking Charge Notice is cancelled
in full and that all collection activity is suspended
immediately pending resolution of this dispute. I am aware that
it is improper for a debt collector to continue pursuing a debt
that is formally and actively disputed.
#Post#: 116560--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for re-entering a LIDL & pure gym car park - Letter
from ELMS Legal
DIR By: K12345678
Date: April 21, 2026, 7:45 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I only appealed to the law firm, I ignored the ones from excel
parking and the debt collectors.
#Post#: 116589--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for re-entering a LIDL & pure gym car park - Letter
from ELMS Legal
DIR By: Sander333
Date: April 21, 2026, 10:30 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The law firm and debt collectors are only interested in your
money. Place on your thread the PCN and any signs for further
advice. Your best course of action was to appeal to the parking
company and POPLA IAS . You will probably get lots of contact
from the debt collectors and possible court papers.
#Post#: 116609--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for re-entering a LIDL & pure gym car park - Letter
from ELMS Legal
DIR By: K12345678
Date: April 21, 2026, 1:06 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Is there a way I can get out of this even though i ignored the
first few tickets so my time to appeal has gone.
What is best for me to do now?
#Post#: 116611--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for re-entering a LIDL & pure gym car park - Letter
from ELMS Legal
DIR By: Sander333
Date: April 21, 2026, 1:10 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Post up the information that may be able to assist you it looks
as if this will end up in Court given what has happened thus
far.
#Post#: 116620--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for re-entering a LIDL & pure gym car park - Letter
from ELMS Legal
DIR By: K12345678
Date: April 21, 2026, 1:37 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Which information do you mean?
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page