Free Traffic Legal Advice

Live cases legal advice => Private parking tickets => Topic started by: LondonTraveller84 on April 26, 2026, 01:16:22 pm

Title: Re: BPA/Parking Eye - Lee Valley Ice Centre
Post by: jfollows on April 28, 2026, 06:09:36 pm
Good.
Thank you for letting us know.
Title: Re: BPA/Parking Eye - Lee Valley Ice Centre
Post by: LondonTraveller84 on April 28, 2026, 06:03:57 pm
As promised an update - I spoke to the centre staff, they go nope they can't do nothing and I'll have to speak to Parkigneye, however I wasnt fully convinced, as I know other places can cancel, so I grabbed someone else who seemed more senior and he took the PCN details and managed to cancel it :)
Title: Re: BPA/Parking Eye - Lee Valley Ice Centre
Post by: jfollows on April 27, 2026, 11:32:14 am
Google - https://www.leevalleypark.org.uk/byelaws

Took about 5 seconds to find.

If the land is covered by byelaws, it’s not “relevant land” for the purposes of PoFA 2012 and, if the driver has not been identified, liability can not be transferred from the unknown driver to the registered keeper.

See https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4

Quote
3(1)In this Schedule “relevant land” means any land (including land above or below ground level) other than—

(a)a highway maintainable at the public expense (within the meaning of section 329(1) of the Highways Act 1980);

(b)a parking place which is provided or controlled by a traffic authority;

(c)any land (not falling within paragraph (a) or (b)) on which the parking of a vehicle is subject to statutory control.
Title: Re: BPA/Parking Eye - Lee Valley Ice Centre
Post by: LondonTraveller84 on April 27, 2026, 11:25:56 am
The PCN is POFA compliant so no wiggling out that way.
But is the land relevant land? Depending on the precise boundary, the parking of vehicles would appear to be covered by byelaws, specifically the Lee Valley Regional Park byelaws.

How does one figure out if it is relevant land or not? and if it is covered by the byelaws you've stated, where does that put me, I assume in a good position, that they PCN is not enforcable if one does not give the name of who was driving?
Title: Re: BPA/Parking Eye - Lee Valley Ice Centre
Post by: LondonTraveller84 on April 27, 2026, 09:58:35 am
The PCN is POFA compliant so no wiggling out that way. Best bet is to appeal based on the grounds you've outlined, you might get it reduced to £20 for a keying error. Have you spoken to the ice centre to get it cancelled?

Umff :( I'm going to the centre today, so will speak to them but I am not holding my breath..as they may just say sorry, just try appeal on the ground you had a lesson - But one could argue how is that any different for anyone else that gets a PCN there - Will let you know what the centre say tonight
Title: Re: BPA/Parking Eye - Lee Valley Ice Centre
Post by: DWMB2 on April 27, 2026, 09:38:54 am
The PCN is POFA compliant so no wiggling out that way.
But is the land relevant land? Depending on the precise boundary, the parking of vehicles would appear to be covered by byelaws, specifically the Lee Valley Regional Park byelaws.
Title: Re: BPA/Parking Eye - Lee Valley Ice Centre
Post by: ixxy on April 26, 2026, 06:00:28 pm
The PCN is POFA compliant so no wiggling out that way. Best bet is to appeal based on the grounds you've outlined, you might get it reduced to £20 for a keying error. Have you spoken to the ice centre to get it cancelled?
Title: Re: BPA/Parking Eye - Lee Valley Ice Centre
Post by: jfollows on April 26, 2026, 01:30:31 pm
Thank you, but we’re not professional, we’re just passing on our knowledge and experience.
Title: BPA/Parking Eye - Lee Valley Ice Centre
Post by: LondonTraveller84 on April 26, 2026, 01:16:22 pm
My second private PCN :(

https://ibb.co/Fkk9BP2J
https://ibb.co/jPWXTLk9

In the Lee Valley Ice centre, although I do remember registering the car in the centre as I always do, but now that I have received this PCN, it's making me question if I put in the wrong reg, as I use two cars to go to my lessons.

I assume this carpark woud be owned by the liesure centre, so that argument that's usually used may not work, ie its not enforcable.

The only reason I can think of using is that i genuinly have classes taht evening and can show proof, although the is in my wifes name.


However await your professional input and advice