DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 112696--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for parking w/o any visible signage - Appeal dismissed b
y IAS.
By: InterCity125 Date: March 10, 2026, 9:14 am
---------------------------------------------------------
This is still at the Letter of Claim stage so it is not
necessary to provide a forensic defence at this stage.
We are simply jumping through the hoops so to speak.
You could reply acknowledging the LoC but firmly rebutting the
claim that any money is owed.
The reply should be made as registered keeper and no admission
of who was driving should be made.
A short rebuttal relating to the non-formation of contract would
be pertinent to this particular situation.
They will progress this anyway - it's a game to them - but we
know how to play too.
#Post#: 112745--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for parking w/o any visible signage - Appeal dismissed b
y IAS.
By: owillow99 Date: March 10, 2026, 1:44 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Okay I'll draft something up.
However I am not registered keeper and have previously told them
I was driver.
Does it matter at this stage to switch this to registered
keeper?
#Post#: 112747--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for parking w/o any visible signage - Appeal dismissed b
y IAS.
By: owillow99 Date: March 10, 2026, 2:17 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Draft letter:
Dear Sir or Madam,
I write as the registered keeper of the vehicle in question to
acknowledge receipt of your Letter of Claim dated 27/02/2026.
I firmly rebut the assertion that any sum is owed to your
client, Link Parking, and put you on notice that this claim will
be defended in full should proceedings be issued.
No Contract Was Formed
For a parking charge to be enforceable, a binding contract must
exist between the motorist and the parking operator. A contract
requires an offer, acceptance, and consideration. That essential
requirement is not met in this case, for the following reasons.
First, on the date in question the car park contained no
signage, or no adequate signage, visible to a motorist upon
entering the site. There were no pay stations present. In the
absence of clear, legible signage at the point of entry, no
offer capable of acceptance was communicated to the driver.
Second, and critically, even if signage had been present in
adequate numbers, it is submitted that the signs relied upon by
your client operate as an absolute prohibition on parking, not
as an offer of parking upon stated terms. English contract law
does not permit a "forbidding contract": a sign that says in
effect "no parking" cannot simultaneously constitute a
contractual offer of parking at a specified charge. Such a
construction is a legal nullity. Without a valid offer there can
be no acceptance, and without acceptance there is no contract.
Accordingly, no liability arises.
This argument has been upheld in the county court, including in
UKPC v Masterson, where a judge dismissed the operator's claim
on analogous grounds. I reserve the right to rely on this and
any other relevant authority at trial.
Registered Keeper Position
This letter is written in my capacity as registered keeper of
the vehicle. No admission is made as to the identity of the
driver at the time of the alleged contravention, and nothing in
this letter should be construed as such an admission.
I invite your client to discontinue this matter immediately and
confirm in writing that no further action will be taken. Should
proceedings be issued, I will defend the claim robustly and will
seek recovery of my reasonable costs.
#Post#: 112783--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for parking w/o any visible signage - Appeal dismissed b
y IAS.
By: DWMB2 Date: March 11, 2026, 3:53 am
---------------------------------------------------------
If you are not the registered keeper of the vehicle then you of
course should not state as such
#Post#: 112791--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for parking w/o any visible signage - Appeal dismissed b
y IAS.
By: InterCity125 Date: March 11, 2026, 5:02 am
---------------------------------------------------------
So can I ask whose name is on the LBC, the reminder notice and
the original NtK? Is it the keeper or was the driver nominated
by the keeper - meaning that the parking operator re-issued the
PCN in the drivers name?
#Post#: 112797--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for parking w/o any visible signage - Appeal dismissed b
y IAS.
By: owillow99 Date: March 11, 2026, 5:43 am
---------------------------------------------------------
So the vehicle was borrowed at the time and I didn't want any
letter's sent to the registered keeper. So when I appealed I
stated that I was the driver at the time...
I'm aware from earlier in this post that this was a mistake and
now complicates matters, but I genuinely believed when I first
appealed through the IAS that I would be successful because of
the obvious lack of / appropriate signage.
#Post#: 112819--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for parking w/o any visible signage - Appeal dismissed b
y IAS.
By: InterCity125 Date: March 11, 2026, 8:05 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=owillow99 link=topic=8897.msg112797#msg112797
date=1773225781]
So the vehicle was borrowed at the time and I didn't want any
letter's sent to the registered keeper. So when I appealed I
stated that I was the driver at the time...
I'm aware from earlier in this post that this was a mistake and
now complicates matters, but I genuinely believed when I first
appealed through the IAS that I would be successful because of
the obvious lack of / appropriate signage.
[/quote]
So, once you were nominated as the driver, did the parking
operator re-issue the PCN in your name?
#Post#: 112843--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for parking w/o any visible signage - Appeal dismissed b
y IAS.
By: owillow99 Date: March 11, 2026, 10:03 am
---------------------------------------------------------
No, there was no re-issuing of the PCN. I just appealed via IAS
and then after the appeal was dismissed in October, I received a
letter from BW Legal on 19th December 2025.
#Post#: 112847--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for parking w/o any visible signage - Appeal dismissed b
y IAS.
By: InterCity125 Date: March 11, 2026, 10:15 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=103]DWMB2[/member]
@jfollows
Is anyone intimately familiar with the exact rules when a keeper
nominates a driver in respect to a NtK issued PCN.
Does the Parking Operator have to re-issue the PCN in the
nominated drivers own name?
Just checking this case for a potential procedural error.
#Post#: 112864--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN for parking w/o any visible signage - Appeal dismissed b
y IAS.
By: DWMB2 Date: March 11, 2026, 11:05 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote]Is anyone intimately familiar with the exact rules when a
keeper nominates a driver in respect to a NtK issued
PCN.[/quote]
I'm not sure the keeper has nominated the driver per se, but
instead the driver has simply appealed directly.
Without having had chance to revisit the PPSSCoP in detail, I'm
not aware of any requirements to issue a fresh PCN. One of the
problems when there's an admitted driver is that as PoFA becomes
largely irrelevant, there's a lot less scope for exploiting
procedural errors.
*****************************************************
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page