DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 125445--------------------------------------------------
Re: London Parking Solutions
DIR By: InterCity125
Date: July 23, 2026, 1:02 am
---------------------------------------------------------
They are clearly trying to trick you regrading the drivers
identity.
This is exactly the behaviour which the CMA are clamping down
on.
#Post#: 125470--------------------------------------------------
Re: London Parking Solutions
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: July 23, 2026, 6:38 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: InterCity125 link ---
>
> They are clearly trying to trick you regrading the drivers
identity.
>
> This is exactly the behaviour which the CMA are clamping down
on.
>
--- End Quote ---
I am going to write to them and remind them of what I exposed re
Southwark last year.
HTML https://www.itv.com/news/london/2025-08-19/council-refunds-485000-for-wrongly-fining-drivers-in-the-bus-lane
#Post#: 125492--------------------------------------------------
Re: London Parking Solutions
DIR By: RichardW
Date: July 23, 2026, 8:44 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Anyone would think you were enjoying this ;D
Complaint to LPS about talking rubbish and misusing the Keeper's
data
Complaint to DVLA for breaking the KADOE contract
Complaint to Information Commissioner for misuse of data
Appeal to IAS - just because you can and it involves them in
cost and work, even if 99% chance (OK, apparently it's 96% ::))
they will reject it!
#Post#: 126112--------------------------------------------------
Re: London Parking Solutions
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: July 28, 2026, 3:34 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
So is it agreed that the only legislation under which they can
issue Parking Charge Notices is the POF Act?
#Post#: 126113--------------------------------------------------
Re: London Parking Solutions
DIR By: jfollows
Date: July 28, 2026, 3:38 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
No. PoFA has nothing to do with the issuing of the PCN.
They issue Parking Charge Notices as invoices for payment under
the terms of the contract the driver entered into by reading the
signs and by parking.
The driver is liable and can be taken to court for breach of
contract if the invoice is not paid.
All that PoFA 2012 allows is for the liability to be transferred
from the driver - quite likely unknown - to the registered
keeper - definitely known because the DVLA told them.
They can pursue the driver, if known, for up to six years. To
transfer liability to the registered keeper there are much
shorter time periods, typically 14 days from the date of the
parking event to notify the keeper. If done properly, the keeper
can then be pursued for six years.
Which is why the guidance for this section, which many posters
don't read, but which is clearly marked, has guidance stressing
the likely need not to identify the driver.
It's also the case that many parking companies can't be bothered
to use PoFA or to get it right, because they know that vast
numbers of people just pay up anyway, or ignore county court
claims that lead to a default judgment. And most of them when
challenged maintain that the PCN was "properly issued" and after
"careful consideration" the appeal is rejected; this is simply
because all they care about is £££ and accepting an appeal means
they get £0.
#Post#: 126141--------------------------------------------------
Re: London Parking Solutions
DIR By: InterCity125
Date: July 29, 2026, 2:17 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Hippocrates link ---
>
> So is it agreed that the only legislation under which they can
issue Parking Charge Notices is the POF Act?
>
--- End Quote ---
As already mentioned, these are some important facts;
A "PCN" is a name made up by the private parking companies to
emulate the "PCN" issued by authorities - You guessed it - of
all the acronyms they could have come up with they came up with
the exactly that of the 'official' Penalty Charge Notice.
And guess what, they also use the same yellow square design as
well!
I'm pretty sure that the term "Parking Charge Notice" is never
mentioned in any legislation.
A PCN is nothing more than a 'speculative invoice' in legal
terms.
Of course, they present it like some kind of formal (official)
document.
This is a numbers game and their sole aim is to convince as many
people as possible to pay the charge (hence its wording / design
etc already mentioned).
When the PCN is first issued, although the invoice is addressed
to the keeper, the liability in law remains solely with the
driver - liability remains with the driver for just over 28
days.
POFA only comes into the equation after the 28 day period but
the PCN should be set out in a certain manner to ensure POFA
compliance should the need arise.
There is no requirement that a parking operator must use POFA.
If they wanted they could just send an invoice which says, "Oi,
the driver of your motor owes us £60 because your car was parked
in our car park last week and you never paid nuffing"
Of course, if you refused to pay the invoice then there would be
nothing they could do because such an invoice would not be POFA
compliant and the liability could never be moved from the
unknown driver onto the known keeper.
So, in terms of your question;
They can issue a speculative invoice (PCN) for any reason they
want and the issuing of such an invoice is based totally in
contract law and not in any other specific legislation.
POFA only comes in after 28 days+ in the instance that there is
no payment and no other driver is nominated to the parking
operator.
#Post#: 126160--------------------------------------------------
Re: London Parking Solutions
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: July 29, 2026, 5:28 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=6750]InterCity125[/member]
Thanks. POPLA would not be the route for this lot of course but
rather the IAS.
LPS are saying that it depends on the notice which act applies.
I will draft a complaint as suggested and would welcome views in
very short due course!
BTW, I have a 100% track record in winning private tickets: 3
out of 3! ::)
#Post#: 126574--------------------------------------------------
Re: London Parking Solutions
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: August 2, 2026, 8:09 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Been advised by I.F. to let the sleeping dog lie. 8)
#Post#: 126579--------------------------------------------------
Re: London Parking Solutions
DIR By: tincombe
Date: August 2, 2026, 9:46 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The ball is in LPS's court, so to speak.
Reply #5 sets out what could happen, indeed the only legislative
route open to a 'claimant' to have their claim determined is to
take the matter to court. Nothing in LPS's process gets anywhere
near a regulated process, IAS is a so-called independent
arbitrator (AKA trade body) and LPS do not subscribe to
Alternative Dispute Resolution.
So, while they're considering their next move could I suggest
getting back to their 'evidence' as stated in their Parking
Charge - Notice to Keeper(note the clever use of the hyphen, one
might even think they'd like the recipient to read Parking
Charge Notice which isn't mentioned in the body of the notice
and, as has been observed earlier, is not a regulatory term
anyway, it's a device designed to mislead).
What is their evidence that the vehicle was on site in
contravention of terms and conditions (which must be readable in
order to form a contract) for a period in excess of the
consideration period which the operator must allow by virtue of
their required compliance with the Single Code of Practice which
is a condition of them accessing DVLA keeper data? All I can see
is two photos, only one of which shows a car.
It is not possible to establish a breach without being able to
prove that the vehicle was on site beyond the consideration
period with just a single photo. I can't even see the times
embedded in the photos.
#Post#: 126580--------------------------------------------------
Re: London Parking Solutions
DIR By: jfollows
Date: August 2, 2026, 9:55 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Hippocrates link ---
>
> Been advised by I.F. to let the sleeping dog lie. 8)
>
--- End Quote ---
“I.F.” please?
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 3
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page