DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 81795--------------------------------------------------
Ocean Parking PCN - No Validation - Peel Centre, Stockport
DIR By: Dr-Perry-Cox
Date: July 20, 2025, 12:52 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Good Evening,
The registered owner of the vehicle used the carkpark at the
Peel Centre in Stockport on 27/06/25.
This car park became pay on exit recently, however customers of
certain shops can get up to 2 hours parking for free.
The driver has shopped at M&S, entered their registration upon
the terminal inside M&S but failed to then re-enter it at a
parking machine in the main car park.
Unforturnately, the driver has already made an appeal to the
parking company which was unsuccessful and I attended the store
today to speak to the duty manager but they were uninterested in
helping.
The car park is quite famous locally for being awkward and I
feel the system is convuluted on purpose. You can get access to
images taken on the car park camera inside the store, the
terminal clearly links to Ocean Parking systems yet they want
you to enter it again.
Would anyone kindly be able to review the PCN & appeal letter
and advise if there's anything we can do to contest?
Car Park signage:
HTML https://i.imgur.com/ZUofocR.jpeg
Signage inside M&S:
HTML https://i.imgur.com/amM8The.jpeg
Screen inside M&S after entering your registration:
HTML https://i.imgur.com/6VFaD78.jpeg
Original PCN:
HTML https://i.imgur.com/X7Z3hEq.jpeg
HTML https://i.imgur.com/5fhDBV4.jpeg
Failed Appeal Letter:
[attachimg=1]
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 81810--------------------------------------------------
Re: Ocean Parking PCN - No Validation - Peel Centre, Stockport
DIR By: b789
Date: July 20, 2025, 3:06 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
It's a scam, isn't it? NO amount of appeal to the operator or
the IAS will get this cancelled. The only way will be to fight
it all the way to a claim which will be very hard for them to
win, especially if you have the photographic evidence that your
car was logged in to their system.
However, you have ti go through the motions. Was the drivers
identity revealed in the initial appeal? This can make a
difference at a later stage in the process of defending this.
For now, you can simply submit the following as your IAS appeal.
Whilst it will not be successful, as you are dealing with
scammers and a kangaroo court, it will still make them go
through the motions. and you can have a slight amount of
Schadenfreude knowing that they had to pay the IAS to assess the
appeal unless they concede, which they won't. Come back when you
receive the boilerplate rejection:
--- 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. Strict proof that the NtK was posted in time for it to have
been given within the relevant period. The PPSCoP section
8.1.2(d) Note 2 requires that the operator must retain a record
of the date of posting of a notice, not simply of that notice
having been generated (e.g. the date that any third-party Mail
Consolidator actually put it in the postal system.)
>
> 6. 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.[/indent]
>
> 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#: 81858--------------------------------------------------
Re: Ocean Parking PCN - No Validation - Peel Centre, Stockport
DIR By: Dr-Perry-Cox
Date: July 21, 2025, 2:15 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Unfortunately, the driver at the time didn't take any evidence
of entering the information into the temrinal inside M&S, the
picture is from a later date when I attended to speak to the
duty manager.
The driver who submitted the appeal cannot remember if they
identified themselves as the driver, the rejected appeal letter
appears to show they probably referenced "when I parked I did
this" etc but it's a webform they filled in so cannot get access
to what they wrote to check it.
#Post#: 81918--------------------------------------------------
Re: Ocean Parking PCN - No Validation - Peel Centre, Stockport
DIR By: b789
Date: July 21, 2025, 8:01 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Ah well... you'll just have to wait for the IAS appeal rejection
and move on from there.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1