DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 110064--------------------------------------------------
Gemini Parking Rejection - Brent Cross Town
DIR By: mykohlany
Date: February 17, 2026, 7:22 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi everyone, I’m looking for some help with a PCN I received
from Gemini Parking Solutions at the Brent Cross Town (Claremont
Way) car park. I am the registered keeper of the vehicle.
The driver (my partner) has used this car park for years to take
the children to nearby activities because it always had a 3-hour
free parking limit. However, it turns out Gemini changed the
rules in the first week of January 2026, cutting the free time
down to only 30 minutes. Because the driver is a regular user
and there were no obvious "New Rules" or "Warning" signs, they
didn't realize the terms had changed.
The car was recorded by ANPR cameras staying for 57 minutes on
25/01/2026, which is well within the old 3-hour limit but over
the new 30-minute one. I submitted an initial appeal as the
keeper, explaining that we are regular visitors and weren't
aware of the sudden change, but Gemini rejected it today.
They haven't given me a POPLA code and told me I have to appeal
through the IAS instead. I’ve read that the IAS can be quite
difficult to deal with. Does anyone have experience with this
specific car park or Gemini? I’m looking for advice on how to
argue that the signage wasn't clear enough regarding the change
in terms, and whether it’s worth fighting this at the next
stage. Any help would be appreciated!
#Post#: 110075--------------------------------------------------
Re: Gemini Parking Rejection - Brent Cross Town
DIR By: RichardW
Date: February 17, 2026, 8:08 am
---------------------------------------------------------
See this thread which is very similar:
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/ukpa-pcn-colonndes-overstay/
There should be obvious and clear signs at the entrance if Ts&Cs
have changed. You are right that IAS uphold very few appeals,
but no harm in trying. If you can get some photos that show
there are no signs in accordance with the COP then you can
include that. Post up the PCN, as there's a good chance it is
no compliant to transfer liability to keeper, which can also be
highlighted to IAS.
#Post#: 110128--------------------------------------------------
Re: Gemini Parking Rejection - Brent Cross Town
DIR By: mykohlany
Date: February 17, 2026, 1:10 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi RichardW
Thanks for the reply.
To clarify the signage situation, while there may be signs
present now, the driver (my partner) has used this location for
years without any issues and simply didn't notice that new
restrictions had been implemented because of that long-standing
habit.
I am hoping to appeal on the basis that there should have been a
reasonable transition period or a "grace period" between the
change in terms and the start of enforcement to allow regular
users to adapt, especially since the free period was slashed so
drastically from 3 hours to 30 minutes.
Regarding liability, I am the registered keeper but I was not
the driver at the time. I have handled the appeal process
strictly as the keeper and have not disclosed the driver's
identity to Gemini Parking Solutions. Do you think the lack of a
proper transition period for the new signage, combined with the
fact that they don't know who was driving, provides strong
enough grounds for a successful challenge at the IAS stage?
Here is a link to the PCN
HTML https://storage.to/G1AncMM0X
A copy of the appeal is below:
"I am writing to formally appeal the Penalty Charge Notice
issued on 25 January 2026 at Brent Cross Town-Claremont Way. I
believe this charge is unfair due to the very recent and drastic
change in the parking regulations at this site.
As a regular visitor who frequently takes my children to the
nearby playground, I have always relied on the long-standing
rule that allowed for three hours of free parking. I understand
that at the start of January 2026, Gemini Parking Solutions
changed this limit to only thirty minutes. This is a significant
reduction in time for a community car park, and as a returning
user, I was not met with any prominent or clear warnings that
the rules I have followed for years had suddenly been amended.
My overstay was a genuine oversight and was in no way a
deliberate attempt to avoid payment. Had there been clear
signage alerting regular drivers to the fact that the "3-hour
rule" was no longer in effect, I would have paid the required
fee immediately. I would never intentionally risk a penalty
charge for the sake of a £1 parking fee.
I am happy to pay the standard parking fee for the duration of
my stay on that day to ensure there is no loss of revenue, but I
kindly ask that you cancel the penalty charge itself. Now that I
am fully aware of the new thirty-minute limit, I can assure you
that I will comply with the new tariffs during all future
visits. Given that this change is only a few weeks old, I hope
you will show leniency toward a loyal user of the facilities.
I look forward to hearing from you."
Thank you for your help
#Post#: 110131--------------------------------------------------
Re: Gemini Parking Rejection - Brent Cross Town
DIR By: jfollows
Date: February 17, 2026, 1:17 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
You need to refer to and quote from the code of practice
referred to and quoted from in the link above. Their
self-imposed rules that they aren’t complying with.
I also wouldn’t use words like “unfair”; use “incorrect” or
“unjustified” for example. Remove the emotion and replace with
facts.
#Post#: 110132--------------------------------------------------
Re: Gemini Parking Rejection - Brent Cross Town
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: February 17, 2026, 1:19 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
And back this up with photos showing that they have not put up
additional signage warning that the terms have changed.
#Post#: 110134--------------------------------------------------
Re: Gemini Parking Rejection - Brent Cross Town
DIR By: RichardW
Date: February 17, 2026, 1:43 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Unfortunately you have implied you were the driver, but never
mind.
As jfollows says, you need to be much more direct in an IAS
appeal (and any future parking co appeal - they have no nicer
side, so there is no point trying to appeal to it!).
I would suggest something more along the lines of:
The driver has been a regular user of the car park for several
years, where the free parking has always been 3 hours. In
January 2026, Gemini changed this to 30 minutes free, but failed
to comply with para 3.4 of the Code of Practice to erect
prominent signs at the entrance to the car park alerting regular
users of this change. As a result the driver was not aware that
conditions had changed, and had no reason to seek out the small
print on the Terms and Conditions boards around the car park.
I've attached recent photos of the carpark entrance taken on
[date] which shows that there are still no such required signs
present.
In light of Gemini's failure to comply with the sector Code of
Practice, the PCN has been issued incorrectly, and IAS must
direct them to cancel it.
#Post#: 111114--------------------------------------------------
Re: Gemini Parking Rejection - Brent Cross Town
DIR By: mykohlany
Date: February 25, 2026, 6:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi everyone,
thanks again for the help so far.
Just an update to let you know that I have now heard back from
the IAS and they have rejected my appeal. I don't feel their
reply or the evidence Gemini provided is satisfactory, as it
doesn't really address the lack of clear warning signs for the
change in terms that happened in January.
In my initial appeal to Gemini, I spoke in the first person and
implied I was the driver. At the time, I just appealed out of
instinct as the legal owner and registered keeper, but it was
actually my partner who was driving. I’m concerned this might be
used against me now.
I’m not sure what the best move is from here.
I’ve included a link below to the full appeal and Gemini’s
response through the IAS portal.
HTML https://storage.to/GDb3AXnrm
Any advice on what to do next would be really appreciated.
#Post#: 111156--------------------------------------------------
Re: Gemini Parking Rejection - Brent Cross Town
DIR By: ixxy
Date: February 25, 2026, 12:55 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Your download only appears to contain your appeal, not the IAS
rejection. If you identified as the driver, even
unintentionally, they will hold you liable so that will negate
the relatively weak defence around keeper liability. This hinges
on whether suitable signage was displayed advertising the
significant change in terms. You need to be sure there weren't
(often relatively small temporary code compliant signs and that
your partner simply missed them) otherwise if they were there
and they have photographic proof it'll blow your defence.
For now there's nothing more you can do except ignore the debt
collectors letters and wait for a letter of claim which
shouldn't be ignored.
#Post#: 111157--------------------------------------------------
Re: Gemini Parking Rejection - Brent Cross Town
DIR By: mykohlany
Date: February 25, 2026, 1:06 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Apologies I missed the IAS response. Now attached:
HTML https://storage.to/GE1dRqAKY
#Post#: 111162--------------------------------------------------
Re: Gemini Parking Rejection - Brent Cross Town
DIR By: ixxy
Date: February 25, 2026, 3:14 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
So nothing in there to show they had made it clear there had
been a substantive change in the terms for using the car park,
something to use a the basis of a defence should the need arise
later.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1