DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 105155--------------------------------------------------
Re: £100 fine for 2 min stop
DIR By: InterCity125
Date: January 9, 2026, 2:35 am
---------------------------------------------------------
It has all the hallmarks of a fly-trap site being located right
next to the railway station car park plus very limited parking
for the health centre.
Probably has specific monitoring via higher quality CCTV which
is why they can zoom in far on the vehicle VRM.
If they've invested heavily in enforcement, the parking operator
will tend to ignore the exact Code of Conduct rules on
consideration periods - we see this time and time again.
At appeal the parking operator will argue that loading is
parking regardless of Jopson - they will simply see a 2 min stop
as a monetary opportunity.
It would be helpful to find out if the health centre is built on
railway land in order to rebut PoFA but I'd be surprised if it
was.
#Post#: 106674--------------------------------------------------
Re: £100 fine for 2 min stop
DIR By: gingerstu
Date: January 20, 2026, 9:04 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I used the following template to appeal:
FINAL KEEPER APPEAL (CONSIDERATION PERIOD / NO CONTRACT)
Subject: Appeal as Registered Keeper – PCN [PCN NUMBER] – VRM
[VRM]
Dear National Parking Management Ltd,
I am the registered keeper of vehicle [VRM]. I dispute Parking
Charge Notice [PCN NUMBER] and require it to be cancelled.
1) No contract formed, the vehicle was present for less time
than required to read the terms
Your Notice alleges a contravention period from 13:11:02 to
13:13:34, a total of 2 minutes 32 seconds.
I have since returned to the site and timed the reading of the
signage in full. Reading the signage properly, in its entirety,
takes approximately 3 minutes 31 seconds.
It is therefore impossible for a driver to:
locate the signage,
read and understand the terms in full,
and accept any contractual offer,
within the 2 minutes 32 seconds alleged.
A contract cannot be formed unless the terms are clearly brought
to the driver’s attention and the driver has had a reasonable
opportunity to read and consider them before acceptance. On your
own timings, this was not possible. No acceptance occurred and
no contract was formed.
2) The alleged duration is a reasonable consideration period
A presence of 2 minutes 32 seconds is entirely consistent with a
driver:
entering the site,
locating signage,
attempting to read the terms,
and deciding whether to remain.
This is a classic consideration period, not a parking event.
Charging £100 for a duration shorter than the time required to
read the terms is neither reasonable nor enforceable.
3) “No valid e-permit” presupposes acceptance of terms
Your allegation of “No Valid E-permit” presupposes that the
driver:
read the terms,
understood the e-permit requirement,
and accepted a contractual offer.
Given that the signage cannot be read in full within the time
alleged, that presupposition fails. Without acceptance, no
permit obligation arises.
4) CCTV evidence does not establish acceptance of contractual
terms
I note that the evidence relied upon appears to be derived from
CCTV footage rather than still-image timestamps.
CCTV evidence can show only presence and movement within the
site. It does not establish that the driver:
read or understood the signage,
accepted any contractual offer,
or parked in circumstances capable of creating contractual
liability.
Contractual acceptance requires conduct that objectively
demonstrates agreement to the terms. A brief presence on site,
captured on CCTV, does not meet that threshold. CCTV evidence
therefore cannot establish acceptance of terms or the formation
of a parking contract, particularly over a duration of 2 minutes
32 seconds, which is shorter than the time required to read the
signage in full.
Accordingly, the CCTV evidence relied upon does not prove the
alleged contravention.
5) Keeper liability is denied
I am the registered keeper. I am under no obligation to identify
the driver and will not do so. You must therefore rely strictly
on full compliance with Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms
Act 2012, which is denied. Any failure prevents keeper liability
from arising.
6) Requirement to cancel or provide evidence
Given that the alleged contravention period is shorter than the
time required to read the signage, this charge is not
recoverable and must be cancelled.
If you reject this appeal, please provide:
All photographs relied upon, in full resolution with metadata
A site plan and contemporaneous photographs of all signage,
including wording and placement
Your written landowner authority to issue and enforce charges at
Bradford on Avon Health Centre
Any rejection must include confirmation of the IAS process.
Please cancel the Parking Charge Notice.
Yours faithfully,
[Your full name]
Registered Keeper of [VRM]
[Address]
And have now had this response. The appeal has been rejected,
unsurprisingly.
Dear Mrs XXXXXX,
Re: Parking Charge Reference XXXXX (Vehicle: XXXXX)
Contravention: No Valid E-permit / No Valid E-permit
Contravention Date: 28/12/2025 13:11:02
Issue date/time: 31/12/2025 07:33:53
Site Name: Bradford on Avon Health Centre
Town/City:Bradford on Avon
Postcode: BA15 1DQ
Thank you for your appeal received on 13/01/2026 regarding the
above parking charge reference. The appeals
team have reviewed the case and considered the comments that you
have made.
This appeal has been considered in conjunction with the multiple
date/time stamped pictures gathered at the time
of event, along with any applicable comments from the
enforcement team, weighted against any relevant and fully
substantiated mitigating circumstances that may have been
supplied with this appeal.
Reason for issue: No Valid E-permit / No Valid E-permit
It’s important to understand that that parking on private land
that is contracted to and managed by National
Parking Management (NPM) is not a right, its conditional, the
(T&C’s) apply to all users of the site and are fully and
clearly displayed on the parking signs (“The Parking Contract”).
Whilst a consideration period is typically afforded to the
driver to read the parking T&C’s sign they must either
comply with the T&C’s or remove the vehicle from site, a
grace/consideration period is not a free parking period
and will not apply if the driver is making use of the land, in
addition choosing to not read the T&C’s of parking is not
considered a mitigating circumstance it’s a choice.
National Parking Management Limited (NPM) is a business
registered in England & Wales (08237818)
Registered Office: 95 Arundel Road, Worthing, BN13 3EU
Telephone: 0330 043 0342
Website: www.npmservices.co.uk
When the driver decided to park and/or remain on the contacted
land (“The Site”) whilst failing to comply with the
clearly displayed T&C’s the driver automatically entered into a
contractual agreement with NPM and agreed to pay
the amount stated on the parking contract to The Creditor (NPM).
The driver did not have a valid E-permit for the duration of the
parking session (No E-Permit) and therefore parked
in direct contravention of the clearly displayed terms and
conditions.
The appeals team are writing to inform you that the appeal has
been unsuccessful. The driver failed to park the
vehicle in accordance with the clearly displayed T&C’s,
additionally the appellant has failed to substantiate and/or
provide sufficient evidence to the contrary.
As you have declined to nominate a Driver, the named Keeper
remains liable for payment of this Parking Charge.
The internal appeals team find this parking charge to be issued
correctly, we must advise you that once the
discounted settlement rate (if applicable) passes it will not be
offered again, you have now reached the end of our
internal appeals procedure. You may now either pay the amount
due OR appeal further with the Independent
Appeals Service.
If you still believe that the parking charge was issued
incorrectly, then you may appeal further to the Independent
Appeals Service (IAS). You must submit an appeal directly to
them online using the following link:
HTML https://www.theias.org/appeal
If you wish to appeal to the IAS, you should ensure to do so
within 28 days of the date of this letter.
Please note, that should you choose to use the IAS, you will
automatically lose the opportunity to pay the
discounted rate of the charge. If you appeal to the IAS and then
subsequently pay the charge prior to the appeal
being determined, then the appeal will be cancelled, and you
will not be given a further opportunity to contest this
charge.
If you are not appealing to the IAS, you are now required to
make a payment of £60 to reach us by 03/02/2026 or
£100 to reach us by 17/02/2026 to avoid this charge being passed
on to a debt resolution firm, and/or to avoid
county court proceedings. Please be advised that any further
action will incur additional costs.
Payments can be made using a debit or credit card calling the
automated payment line on 0333 023 6890 or
paying online at www.npmservices.co.uk please note NPM do not
accept American Express (AMEX), the payee
will need the parking charge reference number and the vehicle
registration mark (VRM) to use the digital payment
services.
Alternatively, payments can be made by cheque or postal order
made payable to National Parking Management
Limited, it is recommended that all post is sent recorded
delivery to the following address:
Payment Processing Department
National Parking Management Limited
95 Arundel Road
Worthing
West Sussex
BN13 3EU
Please ensure you write the parking charge reference number and
vehicle registration clearly on the reverse, it is
advised that you do not send cash through the post, all postal
payments that arrive be checked and verified
against the date of sending on the envelope.
Please note that we are unable to take telephone conversations
regarding appeals.
The internal appeals process is full and final, and we are
unable to issue any further correspondence regarding
this matter.
Yours sincerely,
Appeals Department
National Parking Management Ltd.
_________________
I think the following is telling:
Whilst a consideration period is typically afforded to the
driver to read the parking T&C’s sign they must either
comply with the T&C’s or remove the vehicle from site, a
grace/consideration period is not a free parking period
and will not apply if the driver is making use of the land, in
addition choosing to not read the T&C’s of parking is not
considered a mitigating circumstance it’s a choice.
I argued that 2 mins is not not sufficient time to read the
signage, but they have CCTV evidence that will show that there
was no attempt to read the signage.
Is this worth fighting further?
TIA
Stu
#Post#: 106677--------------------------------------------------
Re: £100 fine for 2 min stop
DIR By: InterCity125
Date: January 20, 2026, 9:16 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Yes.
Although IAS are unlikely to find in your favour.
This is highly unlikely to get to a court hearing if you follow
advice.
#Post#: 106678--------------------------------------------------
Re: £100 fine for 2 min stop
DIR By: gingerstu
Date: January 20, 2026, 9:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
ok, in for a pennie in for a pound.
What next? Do I just wait and hope it goes away or do I need to
do something more formal?
#Post#: 106692--------------------------------------------------
Re: £100 fine for 2 min stop
DIR By: Sander333
Date: January 20, 2026, 10:20 am
---------------------------------------------------------
IAS will be a waste of time and effort you will have very little
chance of a positive outcome. However if you feel that anything
is to be gained for the future the by all means go ahead you
place your appeal as outlined and PPC replies this is like
tennis match to and fro the onto debt collectors letters and
maybe court.
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 2
DIR Previous Page