URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
  HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 76832--------------------------------------------------
       Gemini Parking Solutions -
   DIR By: bhart
       Date: June 17, 2025, 6:15 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hi,
       I received a parking ticket in post. The Driver was picking up
       child from a class. Driver was there under 30 mins didn't
       realise Driver would have to pay for such a short time.
       Any advice would be appreciated.
       
       #Post#: 76833--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Gemini Parking Solutions -
   DIR By: jfollows
       Date: June 17, 2025, 6:17 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Read
  HTML https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/<br
       />and post what you’ve received so we can see it for ourselves,
       please.
       #Post#: 76873--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Gemini Parking Solutions -
   DIR By: bhart
       Date: June 17, 2025, 9:30 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Picture of ticket attached.
       thank you
       [attachment deleted by admin]
       #Post#: 76875--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Gemini Parking Solutions -
   DIR By: DWMB2
       Date: June 17, 2025, 9:39 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: DWMB2 link ---
       >
       > 3. Post the notice(s) you have received – as well as providing
       important context, the notices may contain/omit details that can
       be used to help you successfully fight the charge. Upload photos
       of any and all notices you have received from the parking
       company. You should show us all pages of the notice(s), remove
       personal details (name/address, PCN reference number, Vehicle
       Registration Mark), but show us all dates and times. Details
       that you think are trivial could help you win, so don’t leave
       anything out.
       --- End Quote ---
       As per the above, we need to see both pages.
       The guide also advises using a third party site to upload images
       where possible.
       #Post#: 76876--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Gemini Parking Solutions -
   DIR By: bhart
       Date: June 17, 2025, 9:43 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [img]
  HTML https://imgur.com/a/2gGtlRZ[/img]
       this link should hopefully work. If not ive attached it again.
  HTML https://imgur.com/a/2gGtlRZ
       
       [attachment deleted by admin]
       #Post#: 76888--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Gemini Parking Solutions -
   DIR By: b789
       Date: June 17, 2025, 11:32 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Easy one to deal with… as long as the unknown drivers identity
       is not revealed. There is no legal obligation on the known
       keeper (the recipient of the Notice to Keeper (NtK)) to reveal
       the identity of the unknown driver and no inference or
       assumptions can be made.
       The NtK is not compliant with all the requirements of PoFA which
       means that if the unknown driver is not identified, they cannot
       transfer liability for the charge from the unknown driver to the
       known keeper.
       Use the following as your appeal. No need to embellish or remove
       anything from it:
       --- Quote ---
       > I am the keeper of the vehicle and I dispute your 'parking
       charge'. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I
       will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your
       client landowner.
       >
       > As your Notice to Keeper (NtK) does not fully comply with ALL
       the requirements of PoFA 2012, you are unable to hold the keeper
       of the vehicle liable for the charge. Partial or even
       substantial compliance is not sufficient. There will be no
       admission as to who was driving and no inference or assumptions
       can be drawn. Gemini has relied on contract law allegations of
       breach against the driver only.
       >
       > The registered keeper cannot be presumed or inferred to have
       been the driver, nor pursued under some twisted interpretation
       of the law of agency. Your NtK can only hold the driver liable.
       Gemini have no hope at IAS, so you are urged to save us both a
       complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.
       --- End Quote ---
       #Post#: 77179--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Gemini Parking Solutions -
   DIR By: bhart
       Date: June 19, 2025, 8:59 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Thank you very much. Will get this sent off and let you know the
       outcome!
       #Post#: 77198--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Gemini Parking Solutions -
   DIR By: ixxy
       Date: June 19, 2025, 11:38 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       And I imagine they will reject that appeal as will the IAS.
       You'd need to carefully explain which elements of POFA the PCN
       doesn't comply with and they almost definitely won't agree with
       you. That said wasnt that notice issued too late? 27th May to
       9th June, 13 days plus 2 for delivery, exceeds the14 days. Would
       have thought spelling that out would be a stronger appeal?
       #Post#: 77209--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Gemini Parking Solutions -
   DIR By: b789
       Date: June 19, 2025, 12:23 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: ixxy link ---
       >
       > That said wasnt that notice issued too late? 27th May to 9th
       June, 13 days plus 2 for delivery, exceeds the14 days. Would
       have thought spelling that out would be a stronger appeal?
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Not for the initial appeal. It is never worth wasting time and
       effort appealing when it will be rejected, no matter what is
       pleaded. As for the IAS appeal, again, not really worth the
       effort but I now use a template for IAS appeals, even if is only
       to cause the operator some effort requiring them to either pay a
       fee to the IAS or concede the appeal, respond to the appeal if
       they don't concede and to alert the IAS assessor that we know
       they are not really legally qualified solicitors or barristers
       if they cannot understand the basics of PoFA and contract law.
       For reference, this is the bare bones of the generic IAS appeal
       and it can be tweaked where necessary:
       --- Quote ---
       > I am the registered keeper of the vehicle. I deny any
       liability for this parking charge and appeal in full.
       >
       > The parking operator bears the burden of proof. It must
       establish that a contravention occurred, that a valid contract
       was formed between the operator and the driver, and that it has
       lawful authority to operate and issue Parking Charge Notices
       (PCNs) in its own name. I therefore require the operator to
       provide the following:
       >
       > [indent]1. Strict proof of clear, prominent, and adequate
       signage that was in place on the date in question, at the exact
       location of the alleged contravention. This must include a
       detailed site plan showing the placement of each sign and
       legible images of the signs in situ. The operator must
       demonstrate that signage was visible, legible, and compliant
       with the IPC Code of Practice that was valid at the time of the
       alleged contravention, including requirements relating to font
       size, positioning, and the communication of key terms.
       >
       > 2. Strict proof of a valid, contemporaneous contract or lease
       flowing from the landowner that authorises the operator to
       manage parking, issue PCNs, and pursue legal action in its own
       name. I refer the operator and the IAS assessor to Section 14 of
       the PPSCoP (Relationship with Landowner), which clearly sets out
       mandatory minimum requirements that must be evidenced before any
       parking charge may be issued on controlled land.
       >
       > In particular, Section 14.1(a)–(j) requires the operator to
       have in place written confirmation from the landowner which
       includes:
       >
       > [indent]• the identity of the landowner,
       > • a boundary map of the land to be managed,
       > • applicable byelaws,
       > • the duration and scope of authority granted,
       > • detailed parking terms and conditions including any specific
       permissions or exemptions,
       > • the means of issuing PCNs,
       > • responsibility for obtaining planning and advertising
       consents,
       > • and the operator’s obligations and appeal procedure under
       the Code.[/indent]
       >
       > These requirements are not optional. They are a condition
       precedent to issuing a PCN and bringing any associated action.
       Accordingly, I put the operator to strict proof of compliance
       with the entirety of Section 14 of the PPSCoP. Any document that
       contains redactions must not obscure the above conditions. The
       document must also be dated and signed by identifiable persons,
       with evidence of their authority to act on behalf of the parties
       to the agreement. The operator must provide an agreement showing
       clear authorisation from the landowner for this specific site.
       >
       > 3. Strict proof that the enforcement mechanism (e.g. ANPR or
       manual patrol) is reliable, synchronised, maintained, and
       calibrated regularly. The operator must prove the vehicle was
       present for the full duration alleged and not simply momentarily
       on site, potentially within a permitted consideration or grace
       period as defined by the PPSCoP.
       >
       > 4. Strict proof that the Notice to Keeper complies with the
       Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA), if the operator is
       attempting to rely on keeper liability. Any failure to comply
       with the mandatory wording or timelines in Schedule 4 of PoFA
       renders keeper liability unenforceable.
       >
       > 5. The IAS claims that its assessors are “qualified solicitors
       or barristers.” Yet there is no way to verify this. Decisions
       are unsigned, anonymised, and unpublished. There is no
       transparency, no register of assessors, and no way for a
       motorist to assess the legal credibility of the individual
       supposedly adjudicating their appeal. If the person reading this
       really is legally qualified, they will know that without strict
       proof of landowner authority (VCS v HMRC [2013] EWCA Civ 186),
       no claim can succeed. They will also know that clear and
       prominent signage is a prerequisite for contract formation
       (ParkingEye v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67), and that keeper liability
       under PoFA is only available where strict statutory conditions
       are met.
       >
       > If the assessor chooses to overlook these legal requirements
       and accept vague assertions or redacted documents from the
       operator, that will speak for itself—and lend further weight to
       the growing concern that this appeals service is neither
       independent nor genuinely legally qualified.
       >
       > In short, I dispute this charge in its entirety and require
       full evidence of compliance with the law, industry codes of
       practice, and basic contractual principles.
       --- End Quote ---
       #Post#: 77212--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Gemini Parking Solutions -
   DIR By: DWMB2
       Date: June 19, 2025, 12:27 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       If the OP is going to bother with an IAS appeal then in this
       case I'd be minded to put the slight extra effort in to mention
       the dates and the relevant period... It's one of the only PoFA
       fails I've seen the IAS actually uphold.
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 2
   DIR Next Page