DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 122873--------------------------------------------------
Ocean Parking | Trace - Unpaid parking charge £170
DIR By: Anon777
Date: June 24, 2026, 2:59 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Looking for advice, thanks in advance.
Received a PCN earlier in the year for an overstay due to
getting a headache whilst parked. I have a medical condition
which is diagnosed, take abortive medication on the onset of
attacks and have all of the medical documentation to prove it.
These headaches can last several hours and have put me in A&E
before, the condition is more manageble now with medication but
the headaches even with medication puts me into a state where I
can't operate a vehicle safely. The parking overstay was 12
minutes and 50 seconds. I appealed with reference to consumer
rights law and their anticipatory duty under equality act law to
accomodate an overstay, (stupidly identifying as the driver, I
know, abuse welcome), Ocean Parking rejected appeal stating that
no restrospective cancellation will be considered, IAS also
rejected.
I have one additional complication now which is this:
Whilst I remained parked on site to recover from the headache
and medication I took, I sat in one of the commercial outlets
adjacent to the car park. I later phoned the commercial outlet
back explaining that I received a PCN and asked if they could
get Ocean Parking to cancel the PCN but due to having gone
through the appeal process and the matter now being with Trace
Debt Recovery, Ocean Parking's response was that I need to now
liaise with Trace Debt Recovery to resolve the matter.
However the story the commercial outlet gave to Ocean Parking
when they requested the cancellation was that the overstay was
due to a nappy change and that I am a regular customer, which
isn't true and isn't what I explained to them or Ocean Parking
in my internal appeal, rather the headache occured during my
daughter's nappy change and that the overstay was caused by the
headache. So Ocean Parking now have two versions of events
relating to this overstay and I feel like an letter of claim is
now more than likely.
May be useful to know that during the appeal process Ocean
Parking said I could have used the "24-hour" phone number to
contact them to prevent a PCN being issued whilst on site or 24
hours after however I pointed out that none of their signage
states that one can prevent the issuance of a PCN by phoning
them or that the "24-hour" contact number can be used for issues
with overstays with reference consumer rights law on undiscoled
and hidden terms. I later found out that their office isn't even
manned on the weekend when the alleged contravention occured and
hasn't been for the last two years. How is anyone supposed to
reasonably know about this hidden procedure and follow it?
One more thing, the overstay ended at 16:40 on Sunday when most
retail outlets are closed. Could this warrant a lesser charge if
it went all the way through to court due to there being less
commercial impact caused by the overstay?
HTML https://ibb.co/KxnFPjn0
HTML https://ibb.co/fgSzRL2
HTML https://ibb.co/B2tkZNxq
HTML https://ibb.co/5hS2qxSr
HTML https://ibb.co/LfKPh3t
#Post#: 122907--------------------------------------------------
Re: Ocean Parking | Trace - Unpaid parking charge £170
DIR By: InterCity125
Date: June 25, 2026, 12:54 am
---------------------------------------------------------
So basically you are now going to have to play the 'long game'.
This is nothing to worry about.
You already have a very good defence which is totally genuine.
You will now receive a series of begging debt letters attempting
to convince you to pay - you will keep but ignore all letters
and make no response whatsoever.
You are then waiting for a Letter Before Claim - at that point
we can provide further support.
So, at the present time, there is nothing to do but wait.
#Post#: 123000--------------------------------------------------
Re: Ocean Parking | Trace - Unpaid parking charge £170
DIR By: Anon777
Date: June 25, 2026, 2:26 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you kind sir. So I will wait.
#Post#: 125006--------------------------------------------------
Re: Ocean Parking | Trace - Unpaid parking charge £170
DIR By: Anon777
Date: July 17, 2026, 8:03 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I received this 'Letter of Claim' from Moorside Legal (attached)
in the post yesterday which I don't believe is an actual Letter
of Claim as I think they're supposed to be sent from HMCTS which
this hasn't been.
The letter contains this front page with a load of gaff such as
how to pay, declaring my finances, schedule, information sheet
and reply form.
I dug up this from the forum which may be useful as I find
myself in a similar situation (quote below)
I guess advice is to still sit tight and wait for an actual
letter of claim from HMCTS or do I respond by email using B789's
reply below?
--- Quote from: b789 link ---
>
> Email the following to help@moorsidelegal.co.uk and CC
yourself:
>
> [quote]Dear Sirs,
>
> Your so-called “Letter Before Claim” is a masterclass in
procedural non-compliance. It reads less like a legal document
and more like a payday loan advert—complete with “friendly team”
and “flexible payment plans.” Charming, but irrelevant.
>
> Let me be clear: this is not a compliant Letter Before Claim
under the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims. It fails to
provide:
>
> [indent]• The basis of the alleged claim (contract? tort?
clairvoyance?)
> • Any evidence whatsoever (no NtK, no signage, no landowner
authority, no contract terms)
> • A breakdown of the sum claimed (is the £170 damages,
consideration, or just wishful thinking?)
> • Copies of key documents relied upon[/indent]
>
> Your letter is devoid of substance, legal reasoning, and basic
compliance. It does not enable informed dialogue, nor does it
satisfy the requirements of paragraphs 3.1(a)–(d), 5.1, or 5.2
of the Protocol. It is procedurally defective and legally
meaningless.
>
> Should proceedings be issued on the back of this nonsense,
then I put you on notice that I will be relying on the cases of
Webb Resolutions Ltd v Waller Needham & Green [2012] EWHC 3529
(Ch), Daejan Investments Limited v The Park West Club Limited
(Part 20) Buxton Associates [2003] EWHC 2872, Charles Church
Developments Ltd v Stent Foundations Limited & Peter Dann
Limited [2007] EWHC 855 in asking the court to impose sanctions
on your client and to order a stay of the proceedings, pursuant
to paragraphs 13, 15(b) and (c) and 16 of the Practice
Direction, as referred to in paragraph 7.2 of the Protocol.
>
> Unless a compliant Letter Before Claim is issued, I will be
referring this matter to the Solicitors Regulation Authority
(SRA) under Rule 1.4 and Rule 2.1 of the SRA Code of Conduct for
Firms, on the basis that your conduct:
>
> [indent]• Misrepresents the legal status of the claim
> • Fails to uphold proper standards of legal service
> • Demonstrates a lack of integrity and competence in
pre-action procedure[/indent]
>
> Should your client issue proceedings based on this defective
LoC, I will present it to the court as evidence of unreasonable
conduct and procedural non-compliance. I will seek:
>
> [indent]• An immediate stay under paragraph 15(b) of the
Practice Direction
> • A costs order under CPR 27.14(2)(g) for unreasonable
behaviour
> • Sanctions under paragraphs 13 and 16 of the Practice
Direction[/indent]
>
> If your client wishes to pursue this matter, I suggest they
instruct solicitors capable of drafting a compliant Letter of
Claim. Until then, I am under no obligation to respond further.
>
> Yours faithfully,
>
> [Your name]
--- End Quote ---
[/quote]
HTML https://ibb.co/fzsCftG3
#Post#: 125009--------------------------------------------------
Re: Ocean Parking | Trace - Unpaid parking charge £170
DIR By: jfollows
Date: July 17, 2026, 8:19 am
---------------------------------------------------------
A Letter of Claim is from a claimant or the claimant’s legal
representative
--- Quote ---
> Steps before issuing a claim at court
> 6. Where there is a relevant pre-action protocol, the parties
should comply with that protocol before commencing proceedings.
Where there is no relevant pre-action protocol, the parties
should exchange correspondence and information to comply with
the objectives in paragraph 3, bearing in mind that compliance
should be proportionate. The steps will usually include—
> (a) the claimant writing to the defendant with concise details
of the claim. The letter should include the basis on which the
claim is made, a summary of the facts, what the claimant wants
from the defendant, and if money, how the amount is calculated;
> (b) the defendant responding within a reasonable time – 14
days in a straight forward case and no more than 3 months in a
very complex one. The reply should include confirmation as to
whether the claim is accepted and, if it is not accepted, the
reasons why, together with an explanation as to which facts and
parts of the claim are disputed and whether the defendant is
making a counterclaim as well as providing details of any
counterclaim; and
> (c) the parties disclosing key documents relevant to the
issues in dispute.
--- End Quote ---
from
HTML https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/pd_pre-action_conduct#6.1
As above, it warrants a reply and will be followed by a county
court claim in the name of Moorside Legal but issued by the
courts.
You will not get a Letter of Claim from the courts.
You should reply, but only as above, and not using their forms
or answering their questions about income etc.
#Post#: 125010--------------------------------------------------
Re: Ocean Parking | Trace - Unpaid parking charge £170
DIR By: InterCity125
Date: July 17, 2026, 8:21 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Reply with the following;
To whom it may concern,
I write with reference with your Letter Before Claim which I
received this morning - I have duly noted its contents.
I am happy to make the following representation;
It is acknowledged that I am the Registered Keeper of the
vehicle in question.
However, the driver is not known to your parking operator client
and there is no legal requirement for me to provide such
information and I will not be providing driver details under any
circumstance because the law does not demand it.
Furthermore, your client's PCN (Notice to Keeper) is not
compliant with the requirements of PoFA Schedule 4 Paragraph
9(2) and fails to convey all the conditions which the
legislation clearly demands.
Therefore, based on the above, there is no legal route by which
I can be liable in this matter and I therefore deny that any
monies are owed by myself to your client.
I believe that this letter clearly sets out the correct legal
position in this matter.
I am sorry that I am unable to help you further.
Best wishes,
xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx
#Post#: 125014--------------------------------------------------
Re: Ocean Parking | Trace - Unpaid parking charge £170
DIR By: Anon777
Date: July 17, 2026, 8:36 am
---------------------------------------------------------
OK, thanks jfollows.
I did mention in my original post that I blabbed about being the
driver, however in the template letters Ocean Parking sent to me
following up the PCN (before handing the case over to Moorside
Legal), Ocean Parking said that they still didn't know who the
driver was, even though I did tell them.
Should I still reply as you advise?
--- Quote from: InterCity125 link ---
>
> Reply with the following;
>
>
> To whom it may concern,
>
> I write with reference with your Letter Before Claim which I
received this morning - I have duly noted its contents.
>
> I am happy to make the following representation;
>
> It is acknowledged that I am the Registered Keeper of the
vehicle in question.
>
> However, the driver is not known to your parking operator
client and there is no legal requirement for me to provide such
information and I will not be providing driver details under any
circumstance because the law does not demand it.
>
> Furthermore, your client's PCN (Notice to Keeper) is not
compliant with the requirements of PoFA Schedule 4 Paragraph
9(2) and fails to convey all the conditions which the
legislation clearly demands.
>
> Therefore, based on the above, there is no legal route by
which I can be liable in this matter and I therefore deny that
any monies are owed by myself to your client.
>
> I believe that this letter clearly sets out the correct legal
position in this matter.
>
> I am sorry that I am unable to help you further.
>
>
> Best wishes,
>
> xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx
>
>
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 125016--------------------------------------------------
Re: Ocean Parking | Trace - Unpaid parking charge £170
DIR By: jfollows
Date: July 17, 2026, 8:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Just do as [member=6750]InterCity125[/member] has advised, if
you wrote back discussing the cheese content of the moon it
wouldn’t make any difference, they’re going to issue a court
claim regardless and you’re just documenting that you’re not a
pushover for them and for the courts.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1