DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 126263--------------------------------------------------
UKPC PCN - Not Parked Correctly - BECKTON TRIANGLE
DIR By: fahim128
Date: July 30, 2026, 5:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi all
I've just received a PCN from UKPC for my vehicle being parked
in Beckton Triangle while "not parked correctly within the
markings of the bay or space"
WHAT HAPPENED: Upon entering the car park, the driver noticed
that the car park was quite empty and there was pleny of space
and therefore just parked without thinking too much about
parking within the bay lines. This did not create inconvenience
to other drivers who were parking as it was very quiet, but it
was done primarily because the car park was relatively empty and
the driver did not think it would impact anyone (the driver had
never heard of anyone getting a ticket for not parking within
lanes perfectly!). You can see from the photos taken with the
PCN that the car park is quite empty around the car
On Wed 29th July, the registered keeper received a PCN through
the post.
The PCN, including All the images taken for the PCN are in this
Dropbox link here, including the signage
DROPBOX LINK WITH ALL IMAGES INC PCN
HTML https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/zacp1asfbb9ag797toq4n/ACD6s5PZzaTIDvvqTBeF3s4?rlkey=snrgkd4322e50gbieo9i8pbdw&dl=0
This is the location:
HTML https://maps.app.goo.gl/76xWo7EcGRUu9ZB96
I really thing it's unfair that a PCN was given for poor parking
while the car park was empty-ish. It did not impede anyone else
I would really appreciate any help with this!
#Post#: 126264--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC PCN - Not Parked Correctly - BECKTON TRIANGLE
DIR By: jfollows
Date: July 30, 2026, 5:30 am
---------------------------------------------------------
One point: the PCN is not compliant with PoFA 2012
(
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4),<br
/>specifically but not limited to
--- Quote ---
> 9(1)A notice which is to be relied on as a notice to keeper
for the purposes of paragraph 6(1)(b) is given in accordance
with this paragraph if the following requirements are met.
>
> (2)The notice must—
>
> (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was
parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;
--- End Quote ---
so that as long as the driver is not identified, the registered
keeper can appeal that there is no liability because of this.
There may be other reasons, so wait for other input before
appealing.
The appeal will be rejected, so prepare for a more detailed
appeal to POPLA in the first place.
#Post#: 126451--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC PCN - Not Parked Correctly - BECKTON TRIANGLE
DIR By: fahim128
Date: August 1, 2026, 4:13 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: jfollows link ---
>
> One point: the PCN is not compliant with PoFA 2012
(
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4),<br
/>specifically but not limited to
> [quote]9(1)A notice which is to be relied on as a notice to
keeper for the purposes of paragraph 6(1)(b) is given in
accordance with this paragraph if the following requirements are
met.
>
> (2)The notice must—
>
> (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was
parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;
--- End Quote ---
so that as long as the driver is not identified, the registered
keeper can appeal that there is no liability because of this.
There may be other reasons, so wait for other input before
appealing.
The appeal will be rejected, so prepare for a more detailed
appeal to POPLA in the first place.
[/quote]
Thanks for your reply and insights. I've run your advice through
Claude and came up with this appeal letter: what do you think?
**Parking Charge Reference Number: 3154961961805**
**Vehicle Registration: VA17 SJO**
**Notice to Keeper dated: 22/07/2026**
Dear Sir/Madam,
I am writing to formally appeal the above Parking Charge Notice,
issued in respect of an alleged contravention at Beckton
Triangle Retail Park, 5 Claps Gate Lane, London, E6 6LG on
15/07/2026.
**Ground of appeal: the Notice to Keeper does not comply with
Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012**
Schedule 4, paragraph 9(2)(a) of the Protection of Freedoms Act
2012 sets out mandatory requirements for a notice to keeper. It
states that the notice must:
"specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked
**and the period of parking** to which the notice relates."
The Notice to Keeper I received specifies only a single
timestamp — "on the 15/07/2026 at 19:06:05" — as the moment the
vehicle was recorded. It does not state a period of parking,
i.e. it gives no start time and end time for the parking event
to which the charge relates. A single point-in-time observation
is not a "period of parking" within the meaning of paragraph
9(2)(a).
As the Notice to Keeper fails to meet this mandatory statutory
requirement, it does not comply with paragraph 9 of Schedule 4.
Consequently, the provisions in paragraph 6 of Schedule 4 which
would otherwise transfer liability from the driver to the
registered keeper do not apply. As I am not obliged to name the
driver, and in the absence of a compliant notice to keeper,
there is no lawful basis on which keeper liability can be
pursued in this case.
I would ask that UK Parking Control Ltd cancel this Parking
Charge Notice on this basis.
I look forward to your written confirmation that this charge has
been cancelled. Should you reject this appeal, please note my
right to escalate to POPLA, and I reserve all rights in relation
to this matter.
Yours faithfully,
#Post#: 126452--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC PCN - Not Parked Correctly - BECKTON TRIANGLE
DIR By: Dave65
Date: August 1, 2026, 4:39 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Also, from a previous poster that said do not pay UKPC a penny.
They will most likely discontinue the claim.
#Post#: 126454--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC PCN - Not Parked Correctly - BECKTON TRIANGLE
DIR By: fahim128
Date: August 1, 2026, 5:27 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Dave65 link ---
>
> Also, from a previous poster that said do not pay UKPC a
penny.
> They will most likely discontinue the claim.
>
--- End Quote ---
As in, just ignore it?
#Post#: 126457--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC PCN - Not Parked Correctly - BECKTON TRIANGLE
DIR By: jfollows
Date: August 1, 2026, 6:22 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The detail on the sign you posted is unreadable, but presumably
it states that cars need to park between the lines, and the
driver entered into a contract by parking according to the terms
on the sign.
The driver is now being invoiced for payment according to that
contract.
Fairness doesn’t come into it. If the driver doesn’t pay, the
driver can be pursued in court for breach of contract.
Companies such as UKPC have almost only one source of income -
that from people who park contrary to their rules and pay them
for it. Breaking their rules means potential breach of contract
means receipt of a PCN.
You need to submit an appeal on the technical failings of the
notice, as discussed above. Your appeal will be rejected but you
are entering into a process which will probably result in
eventual discontinuation of a county court claim. You should
search the forum for “UKPC” and similar things to see the likely
progress and outcome.
#Post#: 126462--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC PCN - Not Parked Correctly - BECKTON TRIANGLE
DIR By: fahim128
Date: August 1, 2026, 7:24 am
---------------------------------------------------------
So The photo of the signage is taken from their website, and was
submitted by them as part of their evidence. I haven’t mentioned
the fairness aspect on my appeal and have stuck to what you
pointed out initially
Is that appeal letter good to submit?
Thanks again!
#Post#: 126464--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC PCN - Not Parked Correctly - BECKTON TRIANGLE
DIR By: jfollows
Date: August 1, 2026, 7:29 am
---------------------------------------------------------
It’ll be rejected, simply because they always do, acceptance
means no ££. But it’s fine as far as I can see. If you also
can’t read the sign then you may want to add something about
this too.
#Post#: 126518--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC PCN - Not Parked Correctly - BECKTON TRIANGLE
DIR By: fahim128
Date: August 1, 2026, 4:00 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: jfollows link ---
>
> It’ll be rejected, simply because they always do, acceptance
means no ££. But it’s fine as far as I can see. If you also
can’t read the sign then you may want to add something about
this too.
>
--- End Quote ---
Noted. Amended the letter to include a point of the fact the
photo of the sign is difficult to read. See below. Thanks again
for your help
Dear Sir/Madam,
I am writing to formally appeal the above Parking Charge Notice,
issued in respect of an alleged contravention at Beckton
Triangle Retail Park, 5 Claps Gate Lane, London, E6 6LG on
15/07/2026.
**First ground of appeal: the Notice to Keeper does not comply
with Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012**
Schedule 4, paragraph 9(2)(a) of the Protection of Freedoms Act
2012 sets out mandatory requirements for a notice to keeper. It
states that the notice must:
"specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked
**and the period of parking** to which the notice relates."
The Notice to Keeper I received specifies only a single
timestamp — "on the 15/07/2026 at 19:06:05" — as the moment the
vehicle was recorded. It does not state a period of parking,
i.e. it gives no start time and end time for the parking event
to which the charge relates. A single point-in-time observation
is not a "period of parking" within the meaning of paragraph
9(2)(a).
As the Notice to Keeper fails to meet this mandatory statutory
requirement, it does not comply with paragraph 9 of Schedule 4.
Consequently, the provisions in paragraph 6 of Schedule 4 which
would otherwise transfer liability from the driver to the
registered keeper do not apply. As I am not obliged to name the
driver, and in the absence of a compliant notice to keeper,
there is no lawful basis on which keeper liability can be
pursued in this case.
**Second ground of appeal: UK Parking Control Ltd has not
evidenced that the signage terms were legible**
The Notice to Keeper asserts that "the Terms and Conditions of
the car park were clearly and prominently displayed." The burden
of proving this rests with UK Parking Control Ltd. However, the
photographic evidence of the signage provided in support of this
Parking Charge is not legible — the text of the terms and
conditions cannot be read from the photograph, even on close
inspection.
For a Parking Charge to be enforceable, UK Parking Control Ltd
must be able to demonstrate that the terms were brought
adequately to the attention of the driver by way of clear and
legible signage, in line with the British Parking Association's
Code of Practice, of which it is a member. As the photographic
evidence relied upon fails to establish that the signage was
legible, UK Parking Control Ltd has not discharged its burden of
proving that the terms were adequately displayed, and I do not
accept that a contract on those terms was validly formed.
I look forward to your written confirmation that this charge has
been cancelled. Should you reject this appeal, please note my
right to escalate to POPLA, and I reserve all rights in relation
to this matter.
Yours faithfully,
#Post#: 126538--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC PCN - Not Parked Correctly - BECKTON TRIANGLE
DIR By: InterCity125
Date: August 2, 2026, 1:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The NtK also fails the requirements of paragraph 9(2)(b).
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page