Parking Charge Notice: Private Co. request details. Shall I?
Discussion
Good morning everyone.
I am hoping the learned folk of PH can advise me, please.
I received a Parking Charge Notice from a private firm whilst in a private car park.
The company in question are subcontracted by an estate agent responsible for the grounds, car park and external and communal areas of an apartment complex.
I am contesting the PCN Invoice having set out my numerous reasons in a letter sent to the company's Complaints Department.
I did not include my home address nor my full name, requesting contact be made via a given email address.
I received a email stating they require my name and address in order to process the appeal. Upon checking the small print of their Invoice it does state the same.
As in this instance, if the information is specifically requested, is there a legal requirement to offer it?
Could it just be an internal admin requirement which they have "dressed up" to make it sound legally binding, but have no real legal basis? Could it just be a fishing exercise with the aim to scare the recipient into just paying up?
I do not know why this information is yet required, the ticket being issued to a vehicle not a person. I have offered them a means to contact me, a method they have used.
As I understand it, should they require it, they can easily obtain my name and address from the DVLA, a point highlighted by the company.
I would assume this action is taken to recover a debt, and for this reason I am reluctant to offer up my details at such an early stage.
So, I now hand it over you ladies and gentleman.
Have I got it wrong? Should I just give them the details, there being no genuine reason not to?
Could they come knocking, or are my fears unfounded at this early stage?
Could my reluctance just irritate them to a point where they will pursue this case much further?
Should I reply stating I will not offer personal details, believing it unnecessary to begin an appeal? Assuming this route, I would go on to state something to the effect of ".....the information is available should they wish pursue this matter. I only left to consider the appeal to have begun upon receipt of my original letter".
I've found little on the web regarding the specific issue, so I would please welcome any advice on what to do next.
Thank you in advance
Darren
I am hoping the learned folk of PH can advise me, please.
I received a Parking Charge Notice from a private firm whilst in a private car park.
The company in question are subcontracted by an estate agent responsible for the grounds, car park and external and communal areas of an apartment complex.
I am contesting the PCN Invoice having set out my numerous reasons in a letter sent to the company's Complaints Department.
I did not include my home address nor my full name, requesting contact be made via a given email address.
I received a email stating they require my name and address in order to process the appeal. Upon checking the small print of their Invoice it does state the same.
As in this instance, if the information is specifically requested, is there a legal requirement to offer it?
Could it just be an internal admin requirement which they have "dressed up" to make it sound legally binding, but have no real legal basis? Could it just be a fishing exercise with the aim to scare the recipient into just paying up?
I do not know why this information is yet required, the ticket being issued to a vehicle not a person. I have offered them a means to contact me, a method they have used.
As I understand it, should they require it, they can easily obtain my name and address from the DVLA, a point highlighted by the company.
I would assume this action is taken to recover a debt, and for this reason I am reluctant to offer up my details at such an early stage.
So, I now hand it over you ladies and gentleman.
Have I got it wrong? Should I just give them the details, there being no genuine reason not to?
Could they come knocking, or are my fears unfounded at this early stage?
Could my reluctance just irritate them to a point where they will pursue this case much further?
Should I reply stating I will not offer personal details, believing it unnecessary to begin an appeal? Assuming this route, I would go on to state something to the effect of ".....the information is available should they wish pursue this matter. I only left to consider the appeal to have begun upon receipt of my original letter".
I've found little on the web regarding the specific issue, so I would please welcome any advice on what to do next.
Thank you in advance
Darren
Sign up on Pepipoo and post on their 'private parking tickets' forum.
Also sign up on MoneySavingExpert and post on their similarly-titled forum.
You'll also have to give many more details - were you parked in your own space as per your lease, for example? Or parked in a random private car park you have no connection to? These details are important as there are so many permutations as to how to deal with your issue. And - for goodness sake
- write as if you are a third party to the alleged offence, ie. "the vehicle was parked..." as opposed to "I parked the vehicle..." (to avoid naming the driver accidentally).
From your original post, we know you are the Registered Keeper (RK) of the vehicle, and some 'private parking companies' (PPC) assume the RK was the driver who parked the car so you really need to be careful in dealing with these chinless wonders.
To answer your question - no, you don't need to name the driver nor give an address; but the PPC will make all sorts of misleading suggestions (such as you have already experienced) to get their money
.
Also sign up on MoneySavingExpert and post on their similarly-titled forum.
You'll also have to give many more details - were you parked in your own space as per your lease, for example? Or parked in a random private car park you have no connection to? These details are important as there are so many permutations as to how to deal with your issue. And - for goodness sake
- write as if you are a third party to the alleged offence, ie. "the vehicle was parked..." as opposed to "I parked the vehicle..." (to avoid naming the driver accidentally).From your original post, we know you are the Registered Keeper (RK) of the vehicle, and some 'private parking companies' (PPC) assume the RK was the driver who parked the car so you really need to be careful in dealing with these chinless wonders.
To answer your question - no, you don't need to name the driver nor give an address; but the PPC will make all sorts of misleading suggestions (such as you have already experienced) to get their money
. Thank you for the reply
The Parking Charge Notice was "parking outside an allocated bay". A now former flowerbed, the area was paved more than decade ago for the use of, and has been used as unallocated parking by residents and visitors alike. No signage is displayed that this area is no longer to be used, and the residents haven't been notified of a change.
All the other bays are allocated, but no permits are issued and no database of residents' vehicles exist.
My original letter does imply the author is the driver, but no personal details.
I've been scouring the web since receiving the PCN Invoice, but haven't found anything specific to offering up details upon request.
Darren
The Parking Charge Notice was "parking outside an allocated bay". A now former flowerbed, the area was paved more than decade ago for the use of, and has been used as unallocated parking by residents and visitors alike. No signage is displayed that this area is no longer to be used, and the residents haven't been notified of a change.
All the other bays are allocated, but no permits are issued and no database of residents' vehicles exist.
My original letter does imply the author is the driver, but no personal details.
I've been scouring the web since receiving the PCN Invoice, but haven't found anything specific to offering up details upon request.
Darren
Thanks for the further replies
I am in Norfolk.
The Parking Charge Notice was issued by means of being stuck on my car by a patrol.
The company in question is Norwich Traffic Control - After Googling the company, its director seems to have a less-than-reputable past.
I am certain I have strong grounds to legitimately appeal the Parking Charge Notice from this private company.
I am just unsure whether or not I am legally required to, or even should, send them my details even after they requested them
Darren
I am in Norfolk.
The Parking Charge Notice was issued by means of being stuck on my car by a patrol.
The company in question is Norwich Traffic Control - After Googling the company, its director seems to have a less-than-reputable past.
I am certain I have strong grounds to legitimately appeal the Parking Charge Notice from this private company.
I am just unsure whether or not I am legally required to, or even should, send them my details even after they requested them
Darren
Edited by iluvmercs on Thursday 17th March 09:06
iluvmercs said:
Thanks for the further replies
I am in Norfolk, England.
The Parking Charge Notice was issued after being stuck on my car by a patrol.
The company in question is Norwich Traffic Control - After Googling the company, its director seems to have a less-than-reputable past.
I am certain I have strong grounds to legitimately appeal the Parking Charge Notice from this private company.
I am just unsure whether or not I am legally required to, or even should, send them my details even after they requested them
Darren
You are not obliged to provide your details to them, and you should absolutely not send your details.I am in Norfolk, England.
The Parking Charge Notice was issued after being stuck on my car by a patrol.
The company in question is Norwich Traffic Control - After Googling the company, its director seems to have a less-than-reputable past.
I am certain I have strong grounds to legitimately appeal the Parking Charge Notice from this private company.
I am just unsure whether or not I am legally required to, or even should, send them my details even after they requested them
Darren
They can, if they choose, obtain the registered keeper's details from the DVLA so that they can send a Notice to Keeper. Their NTK is likely to contain mistakes that will result in non-compliance with the Protection of Freedoms Act. Those mistakes will give you an extra "appeal point", in that they will mean that only the driver can be held liable and they can't prove who was driving. If you were to send them your details now, that would effectively be an admission of who was driving.
As an aside, NPC are part of the IPC industry body, and the IPC's appeals process rejects almost 100% of appeals. NPC themselves are highly unlikely to accept your appeal, however good the grounds, since these penalties are their only source of income. Don't give them any details, make them do the work, and you'll be giving them plenty of rope with which to hang themselves.
For now, wait til you get the NTK through the post, and if/when that happens head to pepipoo or the MSE forums for advice on your next steps.
Who owns the apartment block, who instructs the managing agents and who is paying them?
If the OP is the owner of one of the apartments I would be speaking with the managing agents to get the spaces properly marked for a start!.. Not sure I would bother with the parking firm I'd go straight to the managing agent. If other apartment owners are similarly aggrieved there could be a joint approach.
I assume the managing agents have instructed the parking firm due to complaints aout the parking situation in the first place, but if they are going to be instructed all those entitled to park there in the first place need to know where they are allowed to park and spaces need to be clearly marked!
If the OP is the owner of one of the apartments I would be speaking with the managing agents to get the spaces properly marked for a start!.. Not sure I would bother with the parking firm I'd go straight to the managing agent. If other apartment owners are similarly aggrieved there could be a joint approach.
I assume the managing agents have instructed the parking firm due to complaints aout the parking situation in the first place, but if they are going to be instructed all those entitled to park there in the first place need to know where they are allowed to park and spaces need to be clearly marked!
Thank you all for the further replies and for answering my specific question 
You guys have also offered some interesting information further to what I have recently learned about these sort of companies. Thank you
The managing agent is a local estate agent, and I'm not an owner of an apartment.
I had planned to at least reply to their email, and I sent off something earlier stating to the effect of me being under to legal obligation to send my details, so an appeal can begin without it. I then referenced my previous letter stating my reasons, further requesting an appeal be opened and henceforth closed, and finally confirmation the invoice has been cancelled.
Thanks again, everyone
Darren
You guys have also offered some interesting information further to what I have recently learned about these sort of companies. Thank you
The managing agent is a local estate agent, and I'm not an owner of an apartment.
I had planned to at least reply to their email, and I sent off something earlier stating to the effect of me being under to legal obligation to send my details, so an appeal can begin without it. I then referenced my previous letter stating my reasons, further requesting an appeal be opened and henceforth closed, and finally confirmation the invoice has been cancelled.
Thanks again, everyone
Darren
The bay itself was created as an unassigned bay in the parking area, for which it has been used in excess of a decade by numerous visitors and residents without issue.
I was visiting a resident, so I parked up in this space as I, and many others, have done before.
I should say the Parking Charge Notice isn't for parking in a private car park, but for "parking outside an allocated bay". The bay was created to cater for one extra space, unassigned to any apartments. Its status has seemingly changed since the recent employment of this parking company, but without residents' notification, nor any additional signs to inform anyone else of this change.
Darren
I was visiting a resident, so I parked up in this space as I, and many others, have done before.
I should say the Parking Charge Notice isn't for parking in a private car park, but for "parking outside an allocated bay". The bay was created to cater for one extra space, unassigned to any apartments. Its status has seemingly changed since the recent employment of this parking company, but without residents' notification, nor any additional signs to inform anyone else of this change.
Darren
The firm's sign, I found near the entrance after discovering the invoice, states the car park is a "24hr Protected Parking Zone". "Strictly no parking at any time." "Unauthorised parking will result in the driver agreeing to pay a Parking Charge Notice....". It then goes on to explain sums involved, how to pay and what could happen if you don't pay; pretty standard stuff.
It is neither states parking in that space is unauthorised, nor that it isn't a parking bay at all.
Parking within designated bays isn't mentioned.
Further, parking doesn't require any permits and there is no database of residents' cars' information. It is unknown which cars should be parked where, or indeed what cars should be parked there at all.
The general validity of my parking in that car park doesn't appear to be the company's reasoning behind the issue of the Parking Charge Notice, more my "Parking outside an allocated bay", as stated on my invoice.
I take issue with this as the space in question is indeed a bay created long ago, used consistently and regularly for the purpose of unassigned extra parking, and there is nothing to the contrary displayed.
My OP has been kindly answered, so I will see where it goes from my last email.
I appreciate and thank you all for the kind offers of additional advice. It is always welcome, thank you
Darren
It is neither states parking in that space is unauthorised, nor that it isn't a parking bay at all.
Parking within designated bays isn't mentioned.
Further, parking doesn't require any permits and there is no database of residents' cars' information. It is unknown which cars should be parked where, or indeed what cars should be parked there at all.
The general validity of my parking in that car park doesn't appear to be the company's reasoning behind the issue of the Parking Charge Notice, more my "Parking outside an allocated bay", as stated on my invoice.
I take issue with this as the space in question is indeed a bay created long ago, used consistently and regularly for the purpose of unassigned extra parking, and there is nothing to the contrary displayed.
My OP has been kindly answered, so I will see where it goes from my last email.
I appreciate and thank you all for the kind offers of additional advice. It is always welcome, thank you
Darren
iluvmercs said:
The firm's sign, I found near the entrance after discovering the invoice, states the car park is a "24hr Protected Parking Zone". "Strictly no parking at any time." "Unauthorised parking will result in the driver agreeing to pay a Parking Charge Notice....". It then goes on to explain sums involved, how to pay and what could happen if you don't pay; pretty standard stuff.
It is neither states parking in that space is unauthorised, nor that it isn't a parking bay at all.
Parking within designated bays isn't mentioned.
Whoever came up with that notice seems very confused. If "Strictly no parking at any time." means what it says, then nobody can ever park there! Then they proceed to contradict this by referring to "Unauthorised parking..." which implies that one can park if authorised to do so. Talk about conflicting information. It is neither states parking in that space is unauthorised, nor that it isn't a parking bay at all.
Parking within designated bays isn't mentioned.
iluvmercs said:
Further, parking doesn't require any permits and there is no database of residents' cars' information. It is unknown which cars should be parked where, or indeed what cars should be parked there at all.
In which case, coupled with the above inconsistency, it is hard to see how this is enforceable at all. Is there any other wording you haven't mentioned?iluvmercs said:
The general validity of my parking in that car park doesn't appear to be the company's reasoning behind the issue of the Parking Charge Notice, more my "Parking outside an allocated bay", as stated on my invoice.
I take issue with this as the space in question is indeed a bay created long ago, used consistently and regularly for the purpose of unassigned extra parking, and there is nothing to the contrary displayed.
If parking is only permitted (which itself is thrown into doubt by the conflicting wording above) in allocated bays, by whom is this done and how? If the signage does not mandate parking in one and that a failure to do so breaches the (purported) contract then that is a further defect.I take issue with this as the space in question is indeed a bay created long ago, used consistently and regularly for the purpose of unassigned extra parking, and there is nothing to the contrary displayed.
If the PPC tries to use PoFA RK liability (they don't know the identity of the driver) it must be a member of an ATA. If so, which one, BPA or IPC? If it's the former, and the PPC rejects your representations, I reckon you have a very good chance of winning at POPLA. The latter is more problematic.
Go about the whole process the wrong way though and you may inadvertently find yourself up the creek without a paddle. I suggest you go to the MSE forum and read the 'Newbies' pages.
Good afternoon everyone.
I just thought to round off this topic.
A big thank you to everyone for the suggestions, help and advice you've all offered
After not supplying my details, the private parking company decided to email a rejection of my appeal.
I contacted the estate agents responsible for the car park area explaining the situation.
They have seemingly sided with me, as today I am happy to say I have received written confirmation that the Invoice has been cancelled.
Again I thank you all
Darren
I just thought to round off this topic.
A big thank you to everyone for the suggestions, help and advice you've all offered
After not supplying my details, the private parking company decided to email a rejection of my appeal.
I contacted the estate agents responsible for the car park area explaining the situation.
They have seemingly sided with me, as today I am happy to say I have received written confirmation that the Invoice has been cancelled.
Again I thank you all
Darren
iluvmercs said:
After not supplying my details, the private parking company decided to email a rejection of my appeal.
I contacted the estate agents responsible for the car park area explaining the situation.
They have seemingly sided with me, as today I am happy to say I have received written confirmation that the Invoice has been cancelled.
Nice to see a third party act to produce a sensible outcome.I contacted the estate agents responsible for the car park area explaining the situation.
They have seemingly sided with me, as today I am happy to say I have received written confirmation that the Invoice has been cancelled.
Going back to this.
iluvmercs said:
The firm's sign, I found near the entrance after discovering the invoice, states the car park is a "24hr Protected Parking Zone". "Strictly no parking at any time." "Unauthorised parking will result in the driver agreeing to pay a Parking Charge Notice....". It then goes on to explain sums involved, how to pay and what could happen if you don't pay; pretty standard stuff.
It is neither states parking in that space is unauthorised, nor that it isn't a parking bay at all.
Parking within designated bays isn't mentioned.
You might be interested to know what a District Judge at High Wycombe thought about this when dismissing 3 cases where the signage contained very similar wording to yours. As reported by Parking Prankster:It is neither states parking in that space is unauthorised, nor that it isn't a parking bay at all.
Parking within designated bays isn't mentioned.
He started by referring to the Beavis transcript, at paras. 94, and 189/190, which made it clear that it was agreed by all parties that there was a contract between PE and Beavis. He said that analysis didn’t apply in this case, as the notice was absolutely prohibitive, and didn’t communicate any offer of parking. The landowners may have a claim in trespass, but that wasn’t under consideration here.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff