Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Private parking tickets => Topic started by: cferg on March 16, 2026, 06:15:45 pm
-
Most (decent) lawyers would charge more than the claim is worth to represent you. Given that costs are very limited on the small claims track, this generally makes it uneconomical to be represented.
-
No.
The Small Claims track is specifically designed for people to defend themselves at low cost, and depending on who represents the claimant it’s quite possible they will discontinue before having to pay the fee and therefore going to court anyway.
-
Thanks, i'll keep it to the point.
Just so i'm prepared if they do file court action, would i need to seek representation from a solicitor? If so, are there any out there that specialise in these sorts of cases?
-
In my opinion, if you give these people multiple appeal reasons they simply ignore the difficult ones and respond only to the easy ones.
The IAS is the same.
I would personally make a strong single point appeal, and keep the other points for when they reject anyway and you have to file a defence, because a court won’t ignore the points it doesn’t find convenient.
-
Hi all, unsurprisingly they have rejected my appeal and shockingly the appeal response did not address any points raised - such as no evidence of who was driving, the fact that the vehicle had been moved between the timestamped images indicating the vehicle had been moved and reparked, and POFA issues regarding a single period of parking.
I'll be appealing to the IAS but understand they are not consumer friendly. Would someone mind reading the appeal and making sure it's adequate?
"I am the registered keeper of the vehicle and I appeal against the Parking Charge Notice issued by One Parking Solutions.
The operator has failed to establish that any contravention occurred and has failed to demonstrate compliance with Schedule 4 of PoFA - specifically:
No evidence of a single period of parking
The operator relies solely upon timestamped photographs taken on separate dates 24 hours apart (07:10 14 March 2026 and 07:50 15 March 2026).
Paragraph 8(2)(a) of Schedule 4 requires that a Notice to Keeper:
“specify… the period of parking to which the notice relates”.
The operator has failed to identify any continuous or defined period of parking. Two isolated timestamps approximately 24 hours apart do not establish a single parking period.
The operator’s own images also show the vehicle positioned differently within the bay on each date, indicating that the vehicle had been moved and later reparked rather than remaining parked continuously.
No evidence has been produced demonstrating:
continuous presence,
a continuous parking event,
or the duration of any alleged stay.
Accordingly, the operator has failed to satisfy the statutory requirements necessary to establish keeper liability.
Ambiguous and contradictory contravention
The operator alleges:
“Exceeded maximum stay and/or returned within no return time”.
This wording is ambiguous and contradictory. It is unclear whether the operator alleges:
a single continuous overstay, or
two separate parking events involving a prohibited return.
These are materially different allegations requiring different evidence.
The operator has failed to establish which alleged contravention actually occurred.
No evidence of the same driver
The operator has not identified the driver.
A “no return” restriction can only logically apply where the same driver returns within the prohibited period. The operator has provided no evidence demonstrating this.
Instead, the operator merely assumes liability based upon the vehicle registration alone.
Failure to properly consider the appeal
In my original appeal I specifically raised:
the lack of a single defined parking period,
the differing vehicle positioning,
the lack of evidence of continuous parking,
and the Schedule 4 requirements.
The operator’s rejection failed to properly address these points and instead relied upon generic template wording asserting that a contravention occurred without evidential explanation.
The rejection provides no explanation as to:
how a continuous parking period was established,
how Schedule 4 Paragraph 8(2)(a) was satisfied,
or how the alleged contravention was determined from two isolated timestamps.
Administrative and data accuracy concerns
The operator has repeatedly issued correspondence to an address which is an amalgamation of two separate addresses and does not exist.
While not the primary ground of appeal, this raises concerns regarding the accuracy and reliability of the operator’s records and handling of personal data.
Conclusion
The operator has failed to:
establish a single period of parking,
prove continuous presence,
clearly identify the alleged contravention,
demonstrate compliance with Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012,
or provide evidence sufficient to establish keeper liability.
I respectfully request that the appeal is allowed and the Parking Charge Notice is cancelled."
Thanks again for advice provided so far.
-
Thanks, will respond :)
-
The address does not really matter what is the crux of the matter is was there a breach of the conditions of parking.You can explain this to them but under no circumstances disclose who the driver(s) were.
-
Hi all,
I've had a response from the company re my appeal
'We are currently considering your appeal. The address you have supplied does not match the address
supplied by the DVLA.
Please provide proof of the correct address by post or email to: info@oneparking.co.uk by 19th May 2026
referencing your parking charge number.
Please note, if you do not confirm your address by the date stated in this letter, your appeal will not be
considered, and the parking charge may continue to progress, which may incur additional costs.
Yours Sincerely,
One Parking Solution Ltd'
I'm a bit lost here - for context i'm currently living with my partner whom i only recently moved in with. Previously i was living with family. My V5 is registered to the family address which i visit weekly. The NTK i received was to my partners address (i raised this previously, as confused as to how they have obtained this address). When submitting the appeal, i have provided the same address (my partners) as the NtK they sent to me.
I also note, that the address header provided on this response to my appeal is a combination of my family + partners address (i've read it via e-mail) - so an address that does not exist. I've tried to view my appeal on their website to make sure i provided the correct address, but unable to.
Are they able to reject an appeal on the basis that the address doesn't match what they have? Even though i'm responding to their correspondence?
I going to submit a SAR so i can confirm the details i submitted + their sources, but unsure if it'd be actioned in time for the deadline they've provided...
Any advice on how to proceed would be appreciated :)
-
Thanks mate, have submitted the appeal - fingers crossed!
-
That should be fine for an initial appeal. At risk of sounding defeatist they're unlikely to accept whatever you submit, but that at least demonstrates you're prepared to put up a fight.
-
Shameless selfbump, but please could someone have a look and advise if my appeal is adequate? :)
-
Hi all,
WAs going to send of my appeal this evening based on responses to similar issues on other posts:
"Dear Appeals Team,
I am the registered keeper of the vehicle and I write to formally appeal the Parking Charge Notice issued by One Parking Solution Ltd in relation to 14–15 March 2026.
I am not liable for this charge on the following grounds:
1. No evidence of a single period of parking (Schedule 4 non-compliance)
Your allegation relies on images of the vehicle on two separate dates. However, Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 requires that any Notice to Keeper relates to a single, defined period of parking.
You have not identified any continuous period of parking. Instead, you rely on two isolated timestamps across different days. This does not meet the statutory requirement and prevents the establishment of keeper liability.
2. No evidence of continuous parking / no contravention established
No evidence has been provided to show that the vehicle remained parked continuously.
Your own images show the vehicle positioned differently within the bay on each date, indicating that it had been moved and later reparked. Two images taken on separate days do not demonstrate:
a continuous stay exceeding any maximum period, or
a return within any prohibited timeframe
The burden of proof rests with you, and this has not been met.
3. No evidence of the same driver
You have not identified the driver.
Any “no return within 24 hours” term can only apply where the same driver returns within the restricted period. You have provided no evidence to support this, and no such inference can be made from the material provided.
4. Failure to establish keeper liability
As the driver has not been identified, you may only pursue the keeper if you have fully complied with Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.
You are therefore required to demonstrate full compliance with all applicable provisions. In the absence of such compliance, liability cannot be transferred to the keeper.
5. Data accuracy and lawful processing concerns
The Notice to Keeper was sent to an address that does not match the address recorded on the vehicle’s V5C.
Please provide:
the source of the address used
the date it was obtained
your lawful basis for processing this data
This raises concerns regarding the accuracy and lawful handling of personal data.
Conclusion
You have failed to:
identify a single period of parking as required by statute
provide evidence of a continuous stay or breach
establish any basis for keeper liability
In light of the above, I require that this Parking Charge Notice is cancelled.
If you refuse, please provide:
-All evidence relied upon (including full timestamped records)
-Confirmation of full compliance with Schedule 4
-A valid POPLA verification code"
Any advice on this would be appreciated! Cheers
-
Previous address was my parents (still there) - ive asked them to keep an eye out for any letters for me but nothing has come in...
-
The only information that can possibly be provided for a car is from the V5C. A person’s driving licence has no relevance. If you have received something for your car at a new address, someone has taken the V5C information and traced/searched for a new address using the name originally given. Probably after sending the original NtK to the old address, in which case it’s the time in which this first NtK was sent that matters.
Perhaps the first NtK was “returned to sender, not at this address” or similar?
-
Also just to add, the NtK arrived after a period of 28 days (april 15th) from the alleged contravention. Does that nullify the entire ticket? Or is the time period longer as a paper PCN was initially issued (marcg 15th)? I tried to understand the PoFa legislation but getting confused by the wording!
And another point (probably moot) - i was anticipaing the NtK to arrive at my previous address as i have not yet updated the V5c. I did update my DL however to my current address last year. I was under the impression the DVLA would only provide the details from the V5c, but looks like they've provided details from my license, is that an issue?
-
Hi all,
NtK came in this afternoon. Any advise on the best way to proceed? Offences still remain as an either or of exceeding maximum stay / returning within 24 hours
https://ibb.co/mV0Ldr9H
https://ibb.co/mrTGMmGh
Cheers
-
If it's specifically for "no return", maybe the reference should be to "driver(s)". It forestalls any assumption that there was ever one "driver"
-
Great, will do, thank you!
-
I'd wait for the NtK.
-
Hi all,
Just wanted to check if my best bet is to just ignore the PCN and wait to see if a NTK will be issued? Or is it worth appealing the PCN on the grounds outlined in some of the comments (putting the onus on them to prove that it was the same driver on both occaisions / not identifying the driver as PCN is not PoFA compliant)?
Appeal cut off is Sunday and just wanted to be definitely sure i take the best route.
Any advice appreciated - cheers!
-
I have the visitors permit in my vehicle at all times - i do live in the block of flats but only allocated 1 space
??
Sorry, but why not a residents permit if you live there?
I live with my partner and you're allocated 1 space per flat. She was using the residential permit at the time (i had the visitors permit)
-
I have the visitors permit in my vehicle at all times - i do live in the block of flats but only allocated 1 space
??
Sorry, but why not a residents permit if you live there?
-
See https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4
(4)The notice must be given by—
(a)handing it to the keeper, or leaving it at a current address for service for the keeper, within the relevant period; or
(b)sending it by post to a current address for service for the keeper so that it is delivered to that address within the relevant period.
(5)The relevant period for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4) is the period of 28 days following the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to driver was given.
Ah thanks, okay. So assuming that my best bet to ignore the PCN and wait and see if they issue a NTK?
-
See https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4
(4)The notice must be given by—
(a)handing it to the keeper, or leaving it at a current address for service for the keeper, within the relevant period; or
(b)sending it by post to a current address for service for the keeper so that it is delivered to that address within the relevant period.
(5)The relevant period for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4) is the period of 28 days following the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to driver was given.
So deadline for the postal NtK is something like May 12.
-
If it were me, I'd wait for the postal NtK before doing anything.
Give the parking operator the maximum chance to screw up.
They cannot prove that it was the same driver on both occasions and there is no legal requirement for any keeper to reveal any driver details.
I've not had a NTK come yet - is there a cutoff point as for how long i should wait? the PCN states i can only appeal with 14 days of it being isseud - I thought it was a case of i'd receive a PCN or a NTK, not both?
The notice gives alternative breaches i.e. overstaying or returning within.
OP, only visitors are subject to these conditions subject to displaying 'a valid OPS visitor permit'.
Could this be as simple as a visitor permit with start time was clearly displayed in the windscreen and that 7.10am 15 March was more than 12 hours after the clearly indicated start time? I think you need to rule this out first.
I have the visitors permit in my vehicle at all times - i do live in the block of flats but only allocated 1 space. I'm assuming the charge is for returning within 24 hours as both images were taken around the same time (7am) on different days (14th & 15th of March)
-
The notice gives alternative breaches i.e. overstaying or returning within.
OP, only visitors are subject to these conditions subject to displaying 'a valid OPS visitor permit'.
Could this be as simple as a visitor permit with start time was clearly displayed in the windscreen and that 7.10am 15 March was more than 12 hours after the clearly indicated start time? I think you need to rule this out first.
-
If it were me, I'd wait for the postal NtK before doing anything.
Give the parking operator the maximum chance to screw up.
They cannot prove that it was the same driver on both occasions and there is no legal requirement for any keeper to reveal any driver details.
-
Is my best bet to not provide driver details & argue from that angle? how they're unable to enter into a 'contract' with a vehicle itself?
-
https://postimg.cc/ykR37Hb2
Here it is
-
Do you have (or can you easily acquire) any photos of the signage?
'No return within ____' clauses are generally difficult to enforce. Contracts are formed between parking companies and drivers - a vehicle cannot form a contract. Unless the parking company can demonstrate that the same driver parked on both occasions, it's difficult to see how they would demonstrate that a 'No return' term had been breached.
-
Driver received a parking charge for returning within the no return time (24HR no return period).
Am i able to appeal this by flat out refusing to name the driver, given the ticket isn't a notice to keeper?
Physical copy of the PC was issued on windscreen - the images they've provided on the appeal site aren't consistent - one looks like the time / date has been superimposed after being taken as isn't the same format as the others. Although not sure this means anything...
Any advice appreciated
https://postimg.cc/gallery/jtKVfVv