DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 55266--------------------------------------------------
UKPC Parking Charge - Parked Correctly Within the Markings -
Stevenage Leisure Park
DIR By: la_u
Date: January 27, 2025, 2:02 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I am the registered keeper of a vehicle that received a parking
charge at the car park listed in the title.
When the driver of the vehicle entered the car park, they parked
in a space that was next to some construction work that is
ongoing. The space they parked in was adjacent to a space that
had construction fencing partially within it. As a car would not
have been able to park in the bay with construction fencing
partially within it, the driver parked partially in that bay to
increase the space between the vehicle and the vehicle in
another adjacent space.
Is this worth appealing?
HTML https://imgur.com/qOBRD1R
HTML https://imgur.com/BQKQxWm
HTML https://imgur.com/gIB7okD
HTML https://imgur.com/q2lncDh
HTML https://imgur.com/H8TWI19
#Post#: 55282--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC Parking Charge - Parked Correctly Within the Markings -
Stevenage Leisure Park
DIR By: Dave65
Date: January 27, 2025, 4:29 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Well, according to their notice the car was parked correctly!
#Post#: 55310--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC Parking Charge - Parked Correctly Within the Markings -
Stevenage Leisure Park
DIR By: la_u
Date: January 27, 2025, 6:21 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Their notice lists the term that was breached.
#Post#: 55452--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC Parking Charge - Parked Correctly Within the Markings -
Stevenage Leisure Park
DIR By: b789
Date: January 27, 2025, 4:29 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
It may be worth appealing, but not yet.
Hilariously, according to the Notice to Driver (NtD) that was
left on the vehicle, it only says the reason for the PCN is that
the vehicle was "parked correctly within the markings of bay or
space".
HTML https://i.imgur.com/WglSjYa.jpeg
UKPC are a pathetic little company of vexatious ex-clamper
scammers. They have absolutely no idea of the drivers identity
and their PCN does not comply with all the requirements of PoFA
to be able to hold the Keeper liable. You do not appeal an NtD
until day 27 after the issue. You only appeal as the Keeper. The
Keeper is under no legal obligation to identify the driver to an
unregulated private parking company.
By appealing on day 27, there is a good chance that they will
respond and issue an appeal rejection without having ever issued
a postal Notice to Keeper (NtK). Without knowing the drivers
identity, they can only rely on PoFA to hold the keeper liable
as long as the NtK is issued no earlier than 28 days after the
alleged contravention and no later than 56 days after.
Even if all appeals fail, no one pays UJPC a penny of they
follow the advice provided here.
Come back nearer to day 27 after the date of the PCN and we will
provide a suitable appeal that the Keeper can send to UKPC.
#Post#: 56363--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC Parking Charge - Parked Correctly Within the Markings -
Stevenage Leisure Park
DIR By: la_u
Date: February 3, 2025, 8:53 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for the reply.
As said above the notice lists the condition of the car park's
term and conditions that were breached. The vehicle was not
parked correctly within the markings of a bay or space, so the
ticket says the condition that has been breached is "parked
correctly within the markings of a bay or space".
I think with some parking notices issued on private land they
can be unfair, but this one seems fairer than most. The vehicle
wasn't parked within the bay or space which is one of the
conditions of the car park. I just wanted to know if it was
worth appealing based on the fact that the only reason the
vehicle was parked this way is because the space that was being
blocked by parking over the line wouldn't have been useable with
the construction fencing there. Do you think an appeal saying
that much is likely to be rejected on the basis that their rules
are the rules and they have been breached?
From a little bit of research done online it seems to suggest
that issuing a postal NTK is not a requirement if one has been
left on the vehicle which is how this notice was received.
I am a bit dubious of waiting until day 27 as it will mean that
the reduced fee is no longer payable.
I have read through some of the other threads on here and it
seems that the tactic is to basically keep refusing to identify
the driver until it goes to court and then hope they will drop
the case right before the court date? Is that the gist of it?
#Post#: 56365--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC Parking Charge - Parked Correctly Within the Markings -
Stevenage Leisure Park
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: February 3, 2025, 9:01 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: la_u link ---
>
> I think with some parking notices issued on private land they
can be unfair, but this one seems fairer than most.
>
--- End Quote ---
If you think it's fair, you can pay, it's your money not ours.
If you think it isn't, then you can (with a bit of effort and
our support) pay nothing. In my view, it's sharp practice on the
part of UKPC - if the vehicle had been parked like that without
the scaffolding there, I'd say it was a reasonably issued
charge*, as the car would be blocking 2 bays. If everyone did
that, the car park's capacity would essentially be halved.
However, the bay next to them was unusable anyway due to the
scaffolding.
* whether that would mean the keeper owes the money would be a
different matter
--- Quote from: la_u link ---
>
> I am a bit dubious of waiting until day 27 as it will mean I
am out of the reduced fee time frame which is 14 days.
--- End Quote ---
If you're planning to fight this, the discount period is
essentially irrelevant - UKPC routinely reject almost every
appeal, so challenging them will require forgoing this.
--- Quote from: la_u link ---
>
> I have read through some of the other threads on here and it
seems that the tactic is to basically keep refusing to identify
the keeper until it goes to court and then hope they will drop
the case right before the court date? Is that the gist of it?
--- End Quote ---
Essentially, yes. Although our 'hope' that they will discontinue
is not mere speculation on our part, but is instead based on our
observation of several years of them routinely discontinuing
pretty much every case that is competently defended. Prior
conduct is obviously not a guarantee of future conduct, so there
will always be an element of risk, but the following thread
shows the basis for our confidence in this course of action: DCB
LEGAL RECORD OF PRIVATE PARKING COURT CLAIM DISCONTINUATIONS
HTML https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6377263/dcb-legal-record-of-private-parking-court-claim-discontinuations
#Post#: 56376--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC Parking Charge - Parked Correctly Within the Markings -
Stevenage Leisure Park
DIR By: b789
Date: February 3, 2025, 9:33 am
---------------------------------------------------------
For heavens sake... if you think you deserve the PCN then just
go ahead and pay it as the "mugs discount" rate.
No one who is here receiving advice and actually following it
pays a penny to UKPC. Even if this were to go all the way to a
claim in the county court, I can say with better than 99.9%
certainty that it would never reach a hearing and they would
discontinue before they have to pay the trial fee.
UKPC rely on most of their victims being low-hanging fruit on
the gullible tree who will pay up out of ignorance and fear.
I really can't be bothered if you want to waste good money on a
bunch of scammers and so become a part of the problem by
continuing to fund the scam.
#Post#: 56698--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC Parking Charge - Parked Correctly Within the Markings -
Stevenage Leisure Park
DIR By: la_u
Date: February 5, 2025, 3:57 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: DWMB2 link ---
>
> If you think it's fair, you can pay, it's your money not ours.
If you think it isn't, then you can (with a bit of effort and
our support) pay nothing. In my view, it's sharp practice on the
part of UKPC - if the vehicle had been parked like that without
the scaffolding there, I'd say it was a reasonably issued
charge*, as the car would be blocking 2 bays.
>
--- End Quote ---
I think this is the crux of it really. I hoped that a
conventional appeal would be accepted based on the fact that
another vehicle couldn't have used the space that was being
obstructed by the construction fencing.
#Post#: 56699--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC Parking Charge - Parked Correctly Within the Markings -
Stevenage Leisure Park
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: February 5, 2025, 3:59 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: la_u link ---
>
> I hoped that a conventional appeal would be accepted
>
--- End Quote ---
They don't make money from accepting appeals.
#Post#: 56700--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC Parking Charge - Parked Correctly Within the Markings -
Stevenage Leisure Park
DIR By: la_u
Date: February 5, 2025, 4:00 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: b789 link ---
>
>
> UKPC rely on most of their victims being low-hanging fruit on
the gullible tree who will pay up out of ignorance and fear.
>
>
--- End Quote ---
This is 100% true.
You said to come back nearer to day 27 and then submit an
appeal, I assume that's because the notice was attached to the
car rather than sent to me in the post?
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page