DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 105569--------------------------------------------------
GXS Services PCN – Unauthorised Vehicle – Different car in evide
nce, no timestamp on plate, unverifiable location
By: Shadow_77 Date: January 12, 2026, 12:53 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[font=UICTFontTextStyleBody]Hello,[/font]
[font=UICTFontTextStyleBody]I received this parking charge on
Sunday 11th January 2026. The notice is dated January 2nd 2026.
It took 9 days to arrive, so I only have about 4 days left to
submit an appeal before I lose the discount. Any help ASAP would
be appreciated – thanks in advance.[/font]
[font=UICTFontTextStyleBody]The parking charge letter says
“Unauthorised Vehicle”.[/font]
[font=UICTFontTextStyleBody]Firstly, the photographic evidence
they attached doesn’t prove anything. The white car in the photo
isn’t even mine – I drive a BMW 1 Series.[/font]
[font=UICTFontTextStyleBody]Furthermore, on top of that, they
attached an isolated close-up photo of my BMW 1 Series number
plate. The photo shows no time or date stamp. So what does this
evidence even prove?[/font]
[font=UICTFontTextStyleBody]Also, the location is publicly
unverifiable. If you put the whole location they stated into
Google Maps, it doesn’t exist. The letter specifies “Arlington
Seaside, Southampton, SO14 1NB” as the location of the alleged
parking incident.[/font]
[font=UICTFontTextStyleBody]“Arlington Seaside” – since when did
Southampton have a seaside? “SO14 1NB” takes you to the road
“Sussex Road”, which again isn’t specified on the letter.[/font]
[font=UICTFontTextStyleBody]In addition, No “period of parking”
is specified – only a single timestamp (11:33) is given[/font]
[font=UICTFontTextStyleBody]There is not a single photo that
shows my full vehicle parked at the location to prove any breach
occurred.[/font]
[font=UICTFontTextStyleBody]Is this a joke? Is this what they
call evidence? I can’t let them get away with this . Imagine how
many others they have been doing this to. [/font]
[font=UICTFontTextStyleBody]Surely this is a breach and violates
my data through unlawful processing.[/font]
[font=UICTFontTextStyleBody]What do to do now? Appeal first?
[/font]
[font=UICTFontTextStyleBody]
HTML https://ibb.co/Ndf5VtXs[/font]
[font=UICTFontTextStyleBody]
HTML https://ibb.co/WNWDZWhk[/font]
HTML https://ibb.co/Ngb7ttFb
HTML https://www.google.com/maps/@50.9059632,-1.4033744,15a,75y,331.24h,77.43t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sBPgYZyxPKLrhMJ3Bj1zDKA!2e0?utm_campaign=ml-sul&g_ep=Eg1tbF8yMDI2MDEwN18wIJvbDyoASAJQAg%3D%3D
#Post#: 105579--------------------------------------------------
Re: GXS Services PCN – Unauthorised Vehicle – Different car in e
vidence, no timestamp on plate, unverifiable location
By: RichardW Date: January 12, 2026, 2:12 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Are there other pictures on their website? Was your car at the
alleged location?
#Post#: 105590--------------------------------------------------
Re: GXS Services PCN – Unauthorised Vehicle – Different car in e
vidence, no timestamp on plate, unverifiable location
By: Shadow_77 Date: January 12, 2026, 3:16 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
No, there are no other pictures on their website – it’s the
exact same ones as in the letter. Just the isolated plate photo
(no date/time stamp) and the wider shots showing a completely
different white car that isn’t mine ( Our car is BMW 1 Series).
The car was parked legally a bit further down the road in a city
council pay-and-display parking area where they paid for a
ticket. There was no space to get out, so they had to reverse
down the road a little bit, and that’s where their camera picked
up the reg. But their evidence doesn’t show any of that . No
photo of the full car in the private bay at all, Instead they
send me a parking charge of a vehicle that isn’t mine.
Why would they park in a private property bay when they was
already paying in a council one? I’ve even got the parking
ticket
They are taking the mick . No proper photo evidence of my car
being there, wrong vehicle shown, The address they provided is
dodgy and incorrect (“Arlington Seaside” doesn’t exist), and a
close-up of the plate with no timestamp/date anyone could of
took a picture of the reg like that .
Should appeal this first , then complain .
Fed up . I want compensation. You think they can just send
inaccurate parking charges like this and get away with it ? Not
even bothered to check the information properly. Definitely some
unlawful acts.
#Post#: 105601--------------------------------------------------
Re: GXS Services PCN – Unauthorised Vehicle – Different car in e
vidence, no timestamp on plate, unverifiable location
By: DWMB2 Date: January 12, 2026, 4:42 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I wouldn't complicate matters by introducing extraneous appeal
points around the location being 'unverifiable' or them failing
to specify a period of parking. Whilst these are valid
observations, in this case they distract from the key issue
(that your vehicle did not park in the location, and their
evidence shows a different vehicle). If you include them, it may
look more like someone who is trying to find a technicality
through which they can avoid paying a PCN, rather than someone
who has fallen foul of GXS' incompetence.
I'd draft a simple, factual appeal as the keeper, pointing out
that your vehicle was never parked at the location, present for
a brief moment performing a 3 point turn (or whatever it was
actually doing), and that the "evidence" they have provided
shows an entirely different make and model of vehicle, which
clearly isn't yours. You may wish to show us a draft before you
send anything. I would also keep it purely factual, and leave
out any emotional comments, avoiding the temptation to rant -
whilst I understand your frustration, the key to a good appeal
is clarity.
#Post#: 105785--------------------------------------------------
Re: GXS Services PCN – Unauthorised Vehicle – Different car in e
vidence, no timestamp on plate, unverifiable location
By: Shadow_77 Date: January 13, 2026, 6:18 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I have put the key issue first - that my vehicle was not parked
at the location and their evidence shows a different vehicle.
But I also wanted to record the other points as secondary, so
they are on the record.
I am the registered keeper of the vehicle.
The photographic evidence provided does not show my vehicle
parked in any restricted or private bay. The wider images depict
a different white vehicle which is not mine, which is the key
issue. The only image of my vehicle is an isolated close-up of
the number plate, with no visible date, time, location, signage,
or surrounding context. Any appearance of my vehicle on the
camera could have occurred while it was simply moving in the
area, for example reversing or manoeuvring, rather than being
parked in a restricted bay. This fails to comply with Schedule 4
of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, which requires clear
evidence of a contravention in order to hold the registered
keeper liable.
It should also be noted that no clear period of parking has been
specified, the location stated on the notice (“Arlington
Seaside, Southampton, SO14 1NB”) is inaccurate and publicly
unverifiable, and the postcode provided leads to a different
road not identified on the notice. These deficiencies constitute
a breach of Section 50 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, which
requires charges to be fair, transparent, and clearly described.
The operator has processed my personal data, specifically my
vehicle registration, using inaccurate and incomplete evidence,
which is a breach of the Data Protection Act 2018 and the UK
GDPR. GXS Services has also failed to provide evidence that
signage was displayed, that the terms were communicated, or that
any contravention occurred, contrary to the BPA / IPC Code of
Practice.
Issuing a parking charge based on a vehicle that was not parked
at the location alleged, supported by images of a different
vehicle, an incorrect or non-existent location, and incomplete
evidence, amounts to a misrepresentation in breach of the
Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008.
Collectively, these failures demonstrate that the charge is
fundamentally unreliable and cannot be relied upon.
GXS Services has not provided any clear or reliable evidence
showing that my vehicle was parked at the location alleged, what
the parking terms were at the time, or how those terms were
breached. In the absence of such evidence, the charge has no
lawful basis and must be cancelled. Registered keeper liability
has not been established, and the charge should therefore be
withdrawn immediately.
#Post#: 105804--------------------------------------------------
Re: GXS Services PCN – Unauthorised Vehicle – Different car in e
vidence, no timestamp on plate, unverifiable location
By: RichardW Date: January 14, 2026, 2:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Surely your first para should include that the car wasn't
actually there / parked - you have only said that their photos
don't show it parked, which is not the same thing!
#Post#: 105877--------------------------------------------------
Re: GXS Services PCN – Unauthorised Vehicle – Different car in e
vidence, no timestamp on plate, unverifiable location
By: Shadow_77 Date: January 14, 2026, 9:33 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The vehicle was not parked in any restricted or private bay at
the location alleged. The photographic evidence provided does
not show my vehicle parked in any such bay, and the wider images
depict a different white vehicle which is not mine. This is the
key issue. The only image of my vehicle is an isolated close-up
of the number plate, with no visible date, time, location,
signage, or surrounding context. Any appearance of my vehicle on
the camera could have occurred while it was simply moving in the
area, for example reversing or manoeuvring, rather than being
parked in a restricted bay. This fails to comply with Schedule 4
of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.
I’ve added in a sentence at the start of the first paragraph
saying the car wasn’t parked there.
Is everything else fine to send ?
#Post#: 105879--------------------------------------------------
Re: GXS Services PCN – Unauthorised Vehicle – Different car in e
vidence, no timestamp on plate, unverifiable location
By: DWMB2 Date: January 14, 2026, 9:39 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Shadow_77 link=topic=9471.msg105877#msg105877
date=1768404827]
Any appearance of my vehicle on the camera could have occurred
while it was simply moving in the area, for example reversing or
manoeuvring, rather than being parked in a restricted bay.
[/quote]
I'd change "could" to "must", or explain briefly what actually
happened (if you know a 3 point turn took place, for example,
I'd say this).
#Post#: 105882--------------------------------------------------
Re: GXS Services PCN – Unauthorised Vehicle – Different car in e
vidence, no timestamp on plate, unverifiable location
By: Shadow_77 Date: January 14, 2026, 9:52 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I’m not certain and can’t recall exactly what happened, so I’ve
used “could”. Is that okay?
And also is the rest of the appeal okay as I need to send it off
today , the 14 days are close .
#Post#: 105884--------------------------------------------------
Re: GXS Services PCN – Unauthorised Vehicle – Different car in e
vidence, no timestamp on plate, unverifiable location
By: DWMB2 Date: January 14, 2026, 10:02 am
---------------------------------------------------------
In which case yes, stick to could. You are sure that the vehicle
didn't spend time parked there, however, so the wording you have
suggested should be fine.
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page