Parking fine at my own home

• You live in a property, but have no contractual agreement to be there, as you have been allowed to live there by your parents
• Your parents likewise cannot provide you with any documents to prove that they have any contractual agreement to be there
• As a result of not being able to locate a lease, they likewise cannot prove that they have a space(s) demised to them via said lease
• You mentioned at one point "All the agreement mentions is that the car park requires a permit", but as yet we do not know what agreement this is, how it came into your possession, nor which parties said agreement is between
• You have 2 tickets in play. 1 is for parking in a bay that is allocated to you (via the missing lease), and 1 is for parking in a bay allocated to a third party (the housing association).

• Primacy of contract. The parking spot is demised to your parents, who granted you permission to park in it. A difficult argument to run without evidence.
• No contractual offer - we have not yet seen photos of the signage (this would be useful), but if it requires the displaying of a permit, there is an argument to be made that the signage is prohibitive, insofar as it doesn't make a contractual offer to those without a permit to park. The downside here is that you do have a permit, it simply wasn't displayed.
• No commercial justification - you had a permit, but simply forgot to display it, and as such now they are aware you have one, there is no commercial justification for continuing to pursue you. The counter argument here might be that there is a commercial justification for penalising non-diplay, on the basis that the wardens who patrol need to be able to identify who is entitled to park where, so that they can effectively manage parking. This argument could potentially be overcome.

The reason I and other posters have been somewhat labouring the point around the lease is because if PCM eventually sue you in the County Court, primacy of contract would have been by far your strongest arm of defence. There is still likely a decent amount of time before they do take you to court (if they decide to), which should be more than enough time for your parents to obtain a copy of their lease from the landower. But, if they are unwilling to help you out by doing this we will have to explore other options.

Ok, to recap where we are:

• You live in a property, but have no contractual agreement to be there, as you have been allowed to live there by your parents
• Your parents likewise cannot provide you with any documents to prove that they have any contractual agreement to be there
• As a result of not being able to locate a lease, they likewise cannot prove that they have a space(s) demised to them via said lease
• You mentioned at one point "All the agreement mentions is that the car park requires a permit", but as yet we do not know what agreement this is, how it came into your possession, nor which parties said agreement is between
• You have 2 tickets in play. 1 is for parking in a bay that is allocated to you (via the missing lease), and 1 is for parking in a bay allocated to a third party (the housing association).

For the parking charge you have received for parking in your own bay, the following potential arguments:

• Primacy of contract. The parking spot is demised to your parents, who granted you permission to park in it. A difficult argument to run without evidence.
• No contractual offer - we have not yet seen photos of the signage (this would be useful), but if it requires the displaying of a permit, there is an argument to be made that the signage is prohibitive, insofar as it doesn't make a contractual offer to those without a permit to park. The downside here is that you do have a permit, it simply wasn't displayed.
• No commercial justification - you had a permit, but simply forgot to display it, and as such now they are aware you have one, there is no commercial justification for continuing to pursue you. The counter argument here might be that there is a commercial justification for penalising non-diplay, on the basis that the wardens who patrol need to be able to identify who is entitled to park where, so that they can effectively manage parking. This argument could potentially be overcome.

For the parking charge you have received for parking in the Housing Association's spot, the 'No contractual offer' argument would seem to be the best fit, again, subject to what the signs say.

Is for me parking in a bay I'm entitled to park in but forgot a permit. And I have stated that I forgot my permit and submitted evidence of me having a permit. What are the likely directions that this goes down?

what was the "agreement" you read that said you need a permit. who was the agrement issued by and addressed to whom?

the claimant writing to the defendant with concise details of the claim. The letter should include the basis on which the claim is made, a summary of the facts, what the claimant wants from the defendant, and if money, how the amount is calculated;

The reply should include confirmation as to whether the claim is accepted and, if it is not accepted, the reasons why, together with an explanation as to which facts and parts of the claim are disputed

Moorside Legal is definitely a law firm and you should search the forum to find many cases involving them.

Their letter should

Quote

the claimant writing to the defendant with concise details of the claim. The letter should include the basis on which the claim is made, a summary of the facts, what the claimant wants from the defendant, and if money, how the amount is calculated;

, which it clearly doesn’t, it’s utter rubbish, so you should respond

Quote

The reply should include confirmation as to whether the claim is accepted and, if it is not accepted, the reasons why, together with an explanation as to which facts and parts of the claim are disputed

to the effect that you can’t reply to any substantive details in their letter because there aren’t any, but you will be defending the claim in full.

You might want to look at https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/letter-before-claim-received-from-moorside-legal/msg95464/#msg95464, for example. Or just reply more simply to their laughably incompetent letter.

Moorside Legal is definitely a law firm and you should search the forum to find many cases involving them.

Their letter should

Quote

the claimant writing to the defendant with concise details of the claim. The letter should include the basis on which the claim is made, a summary of the facts, what the claimant wants from the defendant, and if money, how the amount is calculated;

, which it clearly doesn’t, it’s utter rubbish, so you should respond

Quote

The reply should include confirmation as to whether the claim is accepted and, if it is not accepted, the reasons why, together with an explanation as to which facts and parts of the claim are disputed

to the effect that you can’t reply to any substantive details in their letter because there aren’t any, but you will be defending the claim in full.

You might want to look at https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/letter-before-claim-received-from-moorside-legal/msg95464/#msg95464, for example. Or just reply more simply to their laughably incompetent letter.

Quote from: jfollows on March 25, 2026, 06:02:23 pm

Moorside Legal is definitely a law firm and you should search the forum to find many cases involving them.

Their letter should

Quote

the claimant writing to the defendant with concise details of the claim. The letter should include the basis on which the claim is made, a summary of the facts, what the claimant wants from the defendant, and if money, how the amount is calculated;

, which it clearly doesn’t, it’s utter rubbish, so you should respond

Quote

The reply should include confirmation as to whether the claim is accepted and, if it is not accepted, the reasons why, together with an explanation as to which facts and parts of the claim are disputed

to the effect that you can’t reply to any substantive details in their letter because there aren’t any, but you will be defending the claim in full.

You might want to look at https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/letter-before-claim-received-from-moorside-legal/msg95464/#msg95464, for example. Or just reply more simply to their laughably incompetent letter.

I have responded exactly as per the link sent to an email found in another thread (Moorside unsurprisingly don't post an email address on their website)

Will see what comes of it if any.

if I get no response am I likely to keep getting pestered or can I consider it dead and buried?

Update: I got an automated email response saying:
"Thank you for contacting Moorside Legal.

Please be advised that this mailbox is not monitored. We request that you access our online portal at

Login - Moorside Legal

portal.moorsidelegal.co.uk

and follow the instructions provided to submit your enquiry.


Alternatively, you may contact us by telephone on 0330 822 9950 between the hours of 9:00am and 5:30pm, Monday to Friday."

If you haven't done so already, I suggest you read up on "CCJ", for example http://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/kellys-storage-luton-universal-parking-enforcement-ltd/msg59804/#msg59804

The fact that you have responded to the BW Legal Letter of Claim is all that matters, whatever you said in it will most likely be ignored. Just as long as you have set out your position, that's all that's needed for now. You're doing it for the courts to demonstrate that you are properly engaged with the process.