DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 120117--------------------------------------------------
PCNs recently received from UKPA / HOZAH
DIR By: littlebee
Date: May 30, 2026, 10:09 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi all,
Looking for some advice regarding several PCNs recently received
from UKPA / HOZAH.
There are around 5 tickets in question relating to 2 vehicles —
one is a company vehicle and the other is the driver’s personal
vehicle.
To be clear from the outset, this is not a case of somebody
intentionally avoiding payment or committing fraud. The driver
has used this location regularly for a long time for genuine
business purposes, including deliveries, collections and
dropping off goods to businesses within the shopping centre
area. This is not simply a standard “customer car park” being
abused for free parking.
The car park has historically allowed a free parking period
(roughly up to an hour), and where stays exceeded that period,
the driver has regularly paid at the exit terminal before
leaving. There has never previously been an issue and payment
has been made many times in the past.
However, more recently, since UKPA/HOZAH took over management of
the site, the exit barrier system appears to have become
unreliable. On numerous occasions the barriers have:
- already been open,
- lifted automatically without payment,
- or appeared faulty/broken.
This has happened repeatedly over a period of time and has
become a noticeable issue at the site.
Because the barriers were regularly opening automatically, the
genuine impression formed was that either:
- the barriers were malfunctioning,
- the system was not operating correctly,
- or no further payment action was required before exit.
On the occasions now resulting in the PCNs, the vehicles exited
normally because the barriers opened automatically without any
warning, refusal of exit, or indication that payment remained
outstanding.
The driver appreciates that parking operators may still say
payment should have been made, and the driver is willing to pay
the legitimate parking tariff for the actual stay durations.
However, demanding around £100 per ticket in these circumstances
feels excessive and disproportionate, especially where:
- the barriers were allowing vehicles to exit freely,
- there was no attempt to evade payment,
- and the actual parking charges would have been significantly
lower.
The driver has also attempted to resolve matters by accessing
the online payment portal, but experienced issues with the
website/payment process and redirects. During this time, the
reduced amounts increased to the full PCN amounts.
The main questions are:
- Does the repeated barrier issue help the driver’s position at
all?
- Would this be considered misleading or inadequate enforcement?
- Is there a reasonable argument to offer payment of the actual
parking tariffs only?
- What is realistically the best route to resolve this without
matters escalating unnecessarily?
Any advice would be appreciated.
#Post#: 120171--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCNs recently received from UKPA / HOZAH
DIR By: Dave65
Date: May 31, 2026, 4:15 am
---------------------------------------------------------
We need to see copies of the PPN`s, with personal details
redacted but leave dates.
The company vehicle one may be better to deal with.
#Post#: 120180--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCNs recently received from UKPA / HOZAH
DIR By: jfollows
Date: May 31, 2026, 6:16 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The driver entered into a contract by parking, under the terms
as displayed on the signs.
The contract will probably be that the driver agrees to pay £100
if no parking tariff is paid.
This is pretty normal.
The parking company probably does not get any money from the
parking tariff, but enforces on the basis that it gets to keep
the money from people who don’t pay.
So there won’t be much interest in a retrospective offer to pay
the parking tariff.
#Post#: 120221--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCNs recently received from UKPA / HOZAH
DIR By: littlebee
Date: June 1, 2026, 2:18 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Dave65 link ---
>
> We need to see copies of the PPN`s, with personal details
redacted but leave dates.
>
> The company vehicle one may be better to deal with.
>
--- End Quote ---
Hi jfollows,
I have attached the PCN, does this help ?
Update: I have uploaded the image and shared the link, but its
not showing on my post ?
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YGhK_0oodomM_O4yIrhX6TTKYSJESd94/view?usp=sharing
[img]
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YGhK_0oodomM_O4yIrhX6TTKYSJESd94/view?usp=sharing[/img]
#Post#: 120222--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCNs recently received from UKPA / HOZAH
DIR By: littlebee
Date: June 1, 2026, 2:21 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: jfollows link ---
>
> The driver entered into a contract by parking, under the terms
as displayed on the signs.
> The contract will probably be that the driver agrees to pay
£100 if no parking tariff is paid.
> This is pretty normal.
> The parking company probably does not get any money from the
parking tariff, but enforces on the basis that it gets to keep
the money from people who don’t pay.
> So there won’t be much interest in a retrospective offer to
pay the parking tariff.
>
--- End Quote ---
OK, thanks for getting back to me and your help.
#Post#: 120223--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCNs recently received from UKPA / HOZAH
DIR By: jfollows
Date: June 1, 2026, 2:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
This is a Notice to Hirer for a hired/leased vehicle after the
parking company obtained details of the hirer from the
registered keeper.
A Notice to Hirer can only transfer liability from the unknown
driver to the hirer if the notice is acompanied by
--- Quote ---
> (a)a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm
to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to
a named person under a hire agreement;
>
> (b)a copy of the hire agreement; and
>
> (c)a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer
under that hire agreement.
--- End Quote ---
Did this happen?
If not, then you can appeal each NtH as the hirer as long as the
driver has not been identified, on the basis that the notice
does not comply with the requirements of the Protections of
Freedoms Act 2012,
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4.
See
paragraphs 13 & 14 in Schedule 4.
A sample apeal which may be suitable can be found on the forum,
for example
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/premier-park-pcn-hire-vehicle-notice-to-hirer-received-but-no-hire-documents-inc/msg112671/#msg112671
#Post#: 120227--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCNs recently received from UKPA / HOZAH
DIR By: littlebee
Date: June 1, 2026, 3:49 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: jfollows link ---
>
> This is a Notice to Hirer for a hired/leased vehicle after the
parking company obtained details of the hirer from the
registered keeper.
>
> A Notice to Hirer can only transfer liability from the unknown
driver to the hirer if the notice is acompanied by
> [quote](a)a statement signed by or on behalf of the
vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the
vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement;
>
> (b)a copy of the hire agreement; and
>
> (c)a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer
under that hire agreement.
--- End Quote ---
Did this happen?
If not, then you can appeal each NtH as the hirer as long as the
driver has not been identified, on the basis that the notice
does not comply with the requirements of the Protections of
Freedoms Act 2012,
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4.
See
paragraphs 13 & 14 in Schedule 4.
A sample apeal which may be suitable can be found on the forum,
for example
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/premier-park-pcn-hire-vehicle-notice-to-hirer-received-but-no-hire-documents-inc/msg112671/#msg112671
[/quote]
Thanks very much - the driver will consider this approach and
provide feedback - is it best to respond to PCN via appeal in
the post ?
Is it likely this position will be rejected by the PCN issuer ?
And what would be the steps beyond that ?
The other PCNS are for the drivers personal vehicle, is it Ok to
post those PCN's also (will that help)
#Post#: 120228--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCNs recently received from UKPA / HOZAH
DIR By: jfollows
Date: June 1, 2026, 3:59 am
---------------------------------------------------------
See the linked post for answers.
For notices to you as keeper, please post one of them if they’re
all the same.
#Post#: 120251--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCNs recently received from UKPA / HOZAH
DIR By: littlebee
Date: June 1, 2026, 5:29 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: jfollows link ---
>
> See the linked post for answers.
>
> For notices to you as keeper, please post one of them if
they’re all the same.
>
--- End Quote ---
I just want to be sure this draft is OK to submit or should
anything be adjusted ?
And how should the letter be signed off, for example, in the
same manner as it was addressed ?
or by the person responding ?
And is it worth mentioning any of issues highlighted before
(issues with barriers) ?
sorry for tons of questions...
Dear Sir/Madam,
Re: Parking Charge Notice OMITTED
Vehicle Registration: OMITTED
I write as the hirer of the above vehicle in relation to the
Parking Charge Notice issued by UK Parking Administration Ltd
(UKPA/HOZAH).
The notice received states that liability for the parking charge
has been transferred to the hirer. However, the documentation
provided does not appear to comply with the requirements set out
under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 in
relation to hire/lease vehicles.
In particular, Paragraph 14 of Schedule 4 requires that, in
order to transfer liability from the vehicle hire/lease company
to the hirer, the operator must provide certain mandatory
documents, including:
* A copy of the hire/lease agreement
* A copy of the statement of liability signed by the hirer
* A copy of the original Notice to Keeper issued to the
lease/hire company
The correspondence received did not include the above documents.
As the mandatory requirements of Schedule 4 have not been
satisfied, liability cannot be transferred to the hirer.
For the avoidance of doubt, the hirer is under no obligation to
identify the driver and will not be doing so.
In light of the above, I respectfully request that this Parking
Charge Notice be cancelled.
Yours faithfully,
NAME OMITTED
------------------
#Post#: 120254--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCNs recently received from UKPA / HOZAH
DIR By: jfollows
Date: June 1, 2026, 5:44 am
---------------------------------------------------------
As in the linked post, I suggest you say “does not comply”
rather than “does not apear to comply”. Use the latter and
they’ll just say “oh yes it does”. Even though they’ll reject
anyway, as in the linked post, I think it’s better to be clear.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 5
DIR Next Page