Formal Claim County Court-Oak Legal Services-Unpaid private parking charge

Hi All,

I am looking for the advice as to how to reply and whether the registered keeper should reply to the Oak Legal Services. I have attached the copies of all correspondence regarding the Parking charge.
Brief history:
1. The registered keeper of the vehicle received a parking charge to the registered keeper on 22 April 2026 from Bridge PAM (attachement REF-1)

2. On 18 April 2026 the vehicle was captured on camera as parked in unauthorised parking location asking to pay £100.00 (reduced to £60.00 if paid in 14 days)

3. The registered keeper has appealed the Bridge PAM within the given deadline saying that "I am the registered keeper and as such I can only be pursued for payment instead of the driver provided the strict legal conditions are met. However, as mandatory statutory wording under PoFA Schedule 4 was included with errors, the company cannot pursue the registered keeper". And, the registered keeper has  actually stated the details of the error.
Please confirm, whether I am correct in thinking that: The parking charge contains the Contravention date and time as 18 April 2026 12.25. However, this is a single time of contravention and not the "period of parking". This failure completely breaks the chain required for keeper liability. Am I correct?

4. On 4 June 2026 the registered keeper has received an email reply (attachement REF-2) from customer services appeals@paymyparkingcharge.com  acting on behalf of ZZPS Limited. The email does not state that the appeal was rejected, but contains the following wording " while the Parking Charge does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA) 2012, this does not affect the validity of the Parking Charge itself". And they are asking the driver to appeal directly to their email address or offering the registered keeper to provide the contact details of the driver.
 
5. On 01 July 2026 the ACTION REQUIRED letter was received from ZZPS asking to pay the remaining balance of £100.00 plus extra £70.00) (attachment REF-3)

7. On 17 July 2026 another ACTION REQUIRED letter was received asking to pay the balance and warning the case will get passed on to GCTT Certified Enforcement Agents (attachment REF-4)

8. On 31 July 2026 the WARNING NOTICE OF TRANSFER TO SOLICITORS was received from GCTT Certified Enforcement Agents warning of legal action via County Court (attachment REF-5)

9. On 14 August 2026 another letter NOTICE OF TRANSFER TO SOLICITORS was received warning of moving the case to solicitors firm (attachment REF-6)

10. On 28 August 2026 the letter from Oak Legal Solicitors was received asking to pay the outstanding balance and warning of starting formal legal proceedings in County Court if outstanding amount of £170.00 is not paid. However, it does not state the deadline for payment, just asking to get in contact. (attachment REF-7)

I have posted here on 8 May 2026 asking for help when original parking charge was received. And now I am looking for an advice as mentioned in the beginning as to whether the registered keeper should ignore or reply to the Oak Legal Services. And whether mentioned in point 3 above is correct and the error cancels the parking charge. What would you advice to do to make them go away?

Thank you for your time and advice!
The attachments are here:





https://ibb.co/gbJWHN5C
https://ibb.co/zWLKyLmJ

It's just another sabre rattling letter to try and get you to pay - could well be ignored (but see below).  A formal letter of claim, the last stage before a court claim, will use that title, and give 30 days to pay.

Whilst the missing period of parking (and a few other points which are not strictly in compliance with POFA) could form the bones of a defence at court - they have royaly shot themselves in the foot with the initial response where they say it's not in accordance with POFA!

You could therefore reply to Oak with a copy of the e-mail from BPAM and point out that there their client has confirmed there is no route to keeper liability and their client would therefore be daft to try and start legal action which, in their own words, they have no hope of winning.

It's just another sabre rattling letter to try and get you to pay - could well be ignored (but see below).  A formal letter of claim, the last stage before a court claim, will use that title, and give 30 days to pay.

Whilst the missing period of parking (and a few other points which are not strictly in compliance with POFA) could form the bones of a defence at court - they have royaly shot themselves in the foot with the initial response where they say it's not in accordance with POFA!

You could therefore reply to Oak with a copy of the e-mail from BPAM and point out that there their client has confirmed there is no route to keeper liability and their client would therefore be daft to try and start legal action which, in their own words, they have no hope of winning.

Thank you for your reply. It gives me confidence to go forward and reply to the legal firm.

You could just wait until a Letter Before Claim is sent.

They will do this regardless of what you write in any letter.

Just sit it out and play the game - you will win in the end.