Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Private parking tickets => Topic started by: sofnet2000 on July 17, 2025, 08:54:05 pm
-
None of which mentions permits.
This is good, and increases your chances of getting the charges cancelled at POPLA.
-
And my question about the sign?
Is the Secure A Space sign you showed us a photo of previously the only one there?
If you asking about the number of secure A space signs there are 3 identical ones, one next to each pair of bays and one in middle of the garages.
There is another sign that says park only in marked bays and another one saying private land. None of which mentions permits.
-
And my question about the sign?
Is the Secure A Space sign you showed us a photo of previously the only one there?
-
The space isn't allocated to me specifically, it is available to all residents on the basis of first come, all together there 4 spaces
The same broad point applies, ensure you have and retain the bit of your lease that grants you the right to park a car in any of those 4 spaces, and any other written evidence of such a right.
Is the Secure A Space sign you showed us a photo of previously the only one there?
come on guys this is ridiculous!!
We agree, which is why we're trying to ensure you place yourself in the best position to challenge it.
Secure A space were brought in few years back when people were parking all over the place and in blocking access to other people's garages, so the leaseholders committee decided to restrict parking to the 4 out 5 bays one of which was left for the cleaners and contractors etc.
When I spoke to one of the directors he said they only came about 5 times in last 5 years, and denied knowing anything about PCS.
I have now emailed secure a space asking them if they had anything to do with all this.
-
The space isn't allocated to me specifically, it is available to all residents on the basis of first come, all together there 4 spaces
The same broad point applies, ensure you have and retain the bit of your lease that grants you the right to park a car in any of those 4 spaces, and any other written evidence of such a right.
Is the Secure A Space sign you showed us a photo of previously the only one there?
come on guys this is ridiculous!!
We agree, which is why we're trying to ensure you place yourself in the best position to challenge it.
-
If they're continuing to dish out PCNs, you'd be wise to do a bit of digging with the landlord/whoever owns the building and property to find out exactly what's gone on to result in them now operating on the site, and to see if the landowner can intervene.
A court claim is likely to eventually arise, and whilst you might have the makings of a good defence, it would in my view still be sensible to take steps to limit the value of the eventual claim, as there's never a 100% guarantee of success. Far better to defend a claim of £300 than £3,000.
Finally, I would ensure you have and retain copies of any evidence that shows that the space your car was parked in is allocated to you in your lease (Any maps for example outlining the boundaries of the space(s), or anything else that demonstrates that space is yours to use, etc.)
Re your questions, you can only appeal a charge to POPLA once that specific charge has been appealed and rejected by the operator.
Re BPA complaint, yes by all means, but again they will first expect you to complain to the operator.
The space isn't allocated to me specifically, it is available to all residents on the basis of first come, all together there 4 spaces I am not sure if other residents have received any PCNs. The PCNs are unfounded because there is no permit required to park, anyone even visitors or neighbours even strangers can park, only condition is to park within the bay as per the sign of secure space who they never come anyway.
I don't really understand how can I be liable to such unlawful parking charge, I feel that I am trying to claim my innocence for something that hasn't occurred, the parking charge itself doesn't show any evidence of anything, no permit requirement nor a picture of permit missing from my windscreen (I can claim that I was displaying a permit), so any idiots can go and print out a letter claiming to be a parking charge for their client and expect people to go to court if they don't pay? come on guys this is ridiculous!!
As I said in my previous posts these people claim to be part of BPA but they are not (their name mentioned under a debt collector) even if we accept they are, they not allowed to issue tickets if I click on the complaint policy link it will take me to a completely different company called Debt Recovery Plus, whether they are same I do not know, but 100% PCS isn't a parking operator and cannot issue parking charges in any form.
I have approached the building director who said he doesn't know them and parking conditions have never changed.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
If they're continuing to dish out PCNs, you'd be wise to do a bit of digging with the landlord/whoever owns the building and property to find out exactly what's gone on to result in them now operating on the site, and to see if the landowner can intervene.
A court claim is likely to eventually arise, and whilst you might have the makings of a good defence, it would in my view still be sensible to take steps to limit the value of the eventual claim, as there's never a 100% guarantee of success. Far better to defend a claim of £300 than £3,000.
Finally, I would ensure you have and retain copies of any evidence that shows that the space your car was parked in is allocated to you in your lease (Any maps for example outlining the boundaries of the space(s), or anything else that demonstrates that space is yours to use, etc.)
Re your questions, you can only appeal a charge to POPLA once that specific charge has been appealed and rejected by the operator.
Re BPA complaint, yes by all means, but again they will first expect you to complain to the operator.
-
You don't have to do anything unless you receive a Letter of Claim (LoC). I don't think that reporting them to the police will result in anything. Just make sure that you keep any other residents in the same situation informed as to how to dal with this.
I have done the appeal (for both PCNs) as per your first post, shall I keep appealing everytime I get one, because these idiots are not going to give up!
Shall I lodge a complaint with BPA or POPLA?
-
You don't have to do anything unless you receive a Letter of Claim (LoC). I don't think that reporting them to the police will result in anything. Just make sure that you keep any other residents in the same situation informed as to how to dal with this.
-
Who are “they” and what did they send you?
Anything from Debt Recovery Plus should be ignored. Debt collectors are irrelevant and you should never contact them.
PCS the idiots who sent me a Parking charging notice (as per first post), it looks like they found our building which has secure a space sign and thought we go and scam people here, they claim I wasn't displaying a permit, there is no permit to display we are not a permit holder parking place.
and by the looks of they will send one every week
-
Who are “they” and what did they send you?
Anything from Debt Recovery Plus should be ignored. Debt collectors are irrelevant and you should never contact them.
-
Guess what guys, they just sent me another one, are these people mad or what?
I am thinking of reporting them to the police as scammers, they are trying to scam me and probably other residents of the building by trying it on.
I have checked them on the BPA website but they are not there, I found a debt collector under the name of "Debt Recovery Plus Ltd also t/as Parking Collection Services & Zenith Collections" they are not allowed to do tickets or to do ANPRs or nothing.
Any advice?
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
From the lease you've shown us, "Premises" is capitalised, suggesting it's a defined term. Is the meaning of "Premises" listed anywhere in the lease, as this might strengthen your argument further by showing that the parking space forms part of your lease?
yes it is listed and it meant to be the flat we live in like the followings:
------------------------------------------------------
The Main Terms of the Tenancy
1- Term of Tenancy.
The Landlord lets to the Tenant the Premises for a period of Twelve Months with a Six Months Break Clause as per Schedule A in the agreement.
4- Fixtures and Fittings
The Tenancy shall include the Fixtures and Fittings in the Premises including all matters specified in the Inventory and Schedule of Condition.
10.3- To keep the Premises and Fixtures and Fittings in a reasonably clean and tidy condition.
10.4- To clean to a good standard or pay for the professional cleaning of the Premises at the end of the
Tenancy, to the same standard to which the Premises and Fixtures and Fittings were cleaned prior to the start of the Tenancy, as stated in the Inventory and Schedule of Condition.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Concerning secure A space was brought in after people starting abusing the parking and blocking other tenant's garages and the only restriction was to park in specified bay as per the signage in my other post and there is no permit required for parking.
I managed to send in an appeal on their online platform and got little confirmation message attached.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
From the lease you've shown us, "Premises" is capitalised, suggesting it's a defined term. Is the meaning of "Premises" listed anywhere in the lease, as this might strengthen your argument further by showing that the parking space forms part of your lease?
-
PCS say they acting on behalf of the Creditor, Secure a Space. When the initial appeal is rejected, you can appeal to POPLA and put them to strict proof that they have a valid contract flowing from the landowner that permits them to issue PCNs at the location. I the 'director' says they are no longer contracted, also try and get that in writing from them.
Either way, there is nothing in the lease that appears to mention any requirement to display a permit or that any third party can apply terms and conditions that supersede your lease agreement terms.
-
the lease says we are all allowed to use the parking spaces as long as we park within marked bays.
Can you please share with us the exact wording of this clause within your lease? It will potentially be a very useful argument in your favour.
attached parking clause of the tenancy agreement
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
the lease says we are all allowed to use the parking spaces as long as we park within marked bays.
Can you please share with us the exact wording of this clause within your lease? It will potentially be a very useful argument in your favour.
-
Just trying appealing on their website, impossible to do it, everytime I upload a picture it gives me error message and without uploading appeal doesn't go through. I gues they do not want appeals, they want scamming people
-
As above, what does your lease say about parking. What it does not say is equally important.
However, this is an easy one to deal with… as long as the unknown drivers identity is not revealed. There is no legal obligation on the known keeper (the recipient of the Notice to Keeper (NtK)) to reveal the identity of the unknown driver and no inference or assumptions can be made.
The NtK is not compliant with all the requirements of PoFA which means that if the unknown driver is not identified, they cannot transfer liability for the charge from the unknown driver to the known keeper.
Use the following as your appeal. No need to embellish or remove anything from it:
I am the keeper of the vehicle and I dispute your 'parking charge'. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner.
As your Notice to Keeper (NtK) does not fully comply with ALL the requirements of PoFA 2012, paragraph 9(2)(a) in particular, you are unable to hold the keeper of the vehicle liable for the charge. Partial or even substantial compliance is not sufficient. There will be no admission as to who was driving and no inference or assumptions can be drawn. PCS has relied on contract law allegations of breach against the driver only.
The registered keeper cannot be presumed or inferred to have been the driver, nor pursued under some twisted interpretation of the law of agency. Your NtK can only hold the driver liable. PCS have no hope at POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.
Comeback when the appeal is rejected.
As I said in previous post, the bays are to be used by any resident first come first served, I asked one of the director who said secure a space contract had expired and they haven't renewed, he also denied any knowledge of PCS or any parking permit existence.
-
Firstly, you say that it was claimed you were parked “in a bay behind my building”. So I guess you own or rent property, and will have some kind of lease or tenancy agreement describing the property and its parking spaces. What does it say - or not say - about parking spaces and is the space you were alleged to have parked in covered by this?
Secondly, do not identify the driver. See https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/
Thirdly, following on from the second point, if the parking space is not covered by a lease or similar, the PCN from PCS does not comply with the legislation (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4) to hold the registered keeper liable. In particular, no “period of parking” is specified, and the vague statement about this is not good enough.
We have 4 bays behind our building, first come first served with only restriction not park outside bays, there is no permit required. secure a space have put up their signs out but they never come because is not worth it for them (the chance of them giving tickets out very minimal). the lease says we are all allowed to use the parking spaces as long as we park within marked bays.
I added pictures of signage and the 2 bays where I was parked in one of them.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
As above, what does your lease say about parking. What it does not say is equally important.
However, this is an easy one to deal with… as long as the unknown drivers identity is not revealed. There is no legal obligation on the known keeper (the recipient of the Notice to Keeper (NtK)) to reveal the identity of the unknown driver and no inference or assumptions can be made.
The NtK is not compliant with all the requirements of PoFA which means that if the unknown driver is not identified, they cannot transfer liability for the charge from the unknown driver to the known keeper.
Use the following as your appeal. No need to embellish or remove anything from it:
I am the keeper of the vehicle and I dispute your 'parking charge'. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner.
As your Notice to Keeper (NtK) does not fully comply with ALL the requirements of PoFA 2012, paragraph 9(2)(a) in particular, you are unable to hold the keeper of the vehicle liable for the charge. Partial or even substantial compliance is not sufficient. There will be no admission as to who was driving and no inference or assumptions can be drawn. PCS has relied on contract law allegations of breach against the driver only.
The registered keeper cannot be presumed or inferred to have been the driver, nor pursued under some twisted interpretation of the law of agency. Your NtK can only hold the driver liable. PCS have no hope at POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.
Comeback when the appeal is rejected.
-
Firstly, you say that it was claimed you were parked “in a bay behind my building”. So I guess you own or rent property, and will have some kind of lease or tenancy agreement describing the property and its parking spaces. What does it say - or not say - about parking spaces and is the space you were alleged to have parked in covered by this?
Secondly, do not identify the driver. See https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/
Thirdly, following on from the second point, if the parking space is not covered by a lease or similar, the PCN from PCS does not comply with the legislation (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4) to hold the registered keeper liable. In particular, no “period of parking” is specified, and the vague statement about this is not good enough.
-
Hi All
I received a PCS pcn claiming that I was parked in a bay behind my building without displaying a valid permit, guess what there is no permit where I live, they claim that they are acting on behalf of secure A space and issued me the pcn 10 days ago on the 07/07 and I only have 14 days since the date of issue to appeal. and there is no evidence of the PCN no picture no video nothing at all, they claim that their warden observed the contrention and that is it, I/ have to take their word for it lol
anyone know about these cowboys? shall I appeal on their website?
Thanks
[attachment deleted by admin]