DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 95580--------------------------------------------------
CPM private Ticket
DIR By: Joseph
Date: October 25, 2025, 3:54 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I got a CPM TICKET. My appeal was unsuccessful. They gave me
ticket in dark road. I believe you guys know portal way beside
Icon tower. I did not know that it was private road. I have hire
and reward insurance. Should I go through IAS? The ticket guy
himself used torch to issue me with a pcn. I even explain them
that it was dark I did not know there was sign and also that it
was private road. So should I go to independent appeal services
or not. I can not upload images or screen shots here.
The APPEAL I made was the following;;
Subject: Appeal against Parking Charge Notice 5080xxxx Dear UK
Car Park Management, I am the registered keeper of vehicle
FH08FYE and I am appealing Parking Charge Notice 5080xxxx. The
alleged contravention occurred at 22:16 in hours of darkness.
First of all, your own evidence shows that the sign could only
be read with the use of a torch/flashlight. This proves the
signage was not sufficiently illuminated or visible to a driver
at the time of the incident. The IPC Code of Practice requires
that signage is clear, legible and visible at all times. That
requirement has clearly not been met. Moreover, a driver cannot
be bound by terms that are not adequately displayed. If the
signage is not visible, no contract can be considered in place.
The location lacks the clear, prominent, and well-lit signage
that is necessary to form a legally binding agreement. At last,
I request that this charge be cancelled. If you refuse, please
supply me with a full copy of the signage map for this site,
showing positions, lighting arrangements, and proof of
compliance with the IPC Code of Practice. I do not consent to
your use of my personal data beyond the handling of this appeal.
Yours faithfully, Registered Keeper.
Unsuccessful Appeal REPLY FROM CPM IS FOLLOWING:::
Thank you for your appeal against the above Parking Charge
Notice.
At UK CPM we consider all appeals on a case-by-case basis. We
take each appeal very seriously and thoroughly investigate any
evidence that has been provided. We appreciate your
circumstances and understand this is not a situation anyone
would like to find themselves in; however, these parking
conditions have been put in place to ensure fair usage for all
motorists and support the needs of our client. After careful
consideration, it is unfortunate that I am writing to you today
to advise that on this occasion, your appeal has been
unsuccessful.
The decision to uphold your parking charge notice has been made
on the following basis.
Whilst we note the comments made in your appeal, the signage on
site clearly states 'No stopping/parking or waiting on double
yellow lines/hatched areas at any time. No exceptions.' As per
our photographic evidence, the vehicle was parked on double
yellow lines which was in contravention of the advertised terms
and conditions. Therefore, we can confirm that this PCN has been
issued correctly.
Either due to the reason for issue and/or the insufficient
evidence provided to support the details of your appeal, we have
considered this PCN and found that it does not fall under the
category of Annex F the Appeals Charter of the Single Code of
Practice. Therefore, if no further evidence is provided, we will
deem this to be our final decision.
You have now reached the end of our internal appeals procedure
and therefore you now have two options; either pay or appeal to
the Independent Appeals Service (IAS) - you cannot do both.
To make payment of the total amount due as shown above, please
use one of the following payment options;
#Post#: 95594--------------------------------------------------
Re: CPM private Ticket
DIR By: RichardW
Date: October 26, 2025, 3:29 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Please post the PCN and a Google street view link to the
location.
You will get nowhere with IAS, but there might be other
shortcomings in the PCN that might. After that you will have to
wait for the court claim which is almost always defendable.
#Post#: 95600--------------------------------------------------
Re: CPM private Ticket
DIR By: Dave65
Date: October 26, 2025, 5:08 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Can you get photos of the site during the night time to show the
poor lighting?
#Post#: 95638--------------------------------------------------
Re: CPM private Ticket
DIR By: b789
Date: October 26, 2025, 11:27 am
---------------------------------------------------------
This would stand very little chance of success in court for them
if it were to ever get that far. It is unlikely to do so.
However, just to frustrate them and show that you are not a
pushover, you should appeal to the IAS with the following
generic appeal:
--- 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 ---
There is very little chance that it will be successful and if it
isn't, you do not pay. The decision is not binding and you will
succeed if they ever try and litigate in the county court.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1