Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Private parking tickets => Topic started by: owillow99 on November 24, 2025, 02:09:28 pm
-
Why would you think that the IAS are in any way reputable or independent?
(https://i.ibb.co/9HJv258c/h9fhvi1v1cb7-png.webp)
-
That is good evidence of their mendacious behaviour. There does not appear to have ever been an entrance sign at this location. If there is one now, take a photo of it.
They will be required to provide evidence of an entrance sign at the location prior to the date of the alleged contravention. As can be seen in GSV, there was no sign in place in March 2023 and no sign ij place on the date you took your photos.
This one will be easy to challenge in a claim and it will be interesting to see whether BW Legal are prepared to let their client take this all the way to a hearing, where they will be in danger of a spanking and a cost order for unreasonable behaviour.
I can't believe how any reasonable person from the IAS dismissed the appeal in the first place!
-
If there is one now, take a photo of it.
+1 - ideally from an angle that makes it obvious that the two photos (i.e. the one showing the new sign, and the previous one showing a lack of a sign) were taken at the same location.
I walked past there earlier this evening and there are no signs whatsoever on the entrance to the car park.
https://ibb.co/nNw7CNTC (https://ibb.co/nNw7CNTC)
https://ibb.co/fVSqgzFV (https://ibb.co/fVSqgzFV)
-
If there is one now, take a photo of it.
+1 - ideally from an angle that makes it obvious that the two photos (i.e. the one showing the new sign, and the previous one showing a lack of a sign) were taken at the same location.
-
That is good evidence of their mendacious behaviour. There does not appear to have ever been an entrance sign at this location. If there is one now, take a photo of it.
They will be required to provide evidence of an entrance sign at the location prior to the date of the alleged contravention. As can be seen in GSV, there was no sign in place in March 2023 and no sign ij place on the date you took your photos.
This one will be easy to challenge in a claim and it will be interesting to see whether BW Legal are prepared to let their client take this all the way to a hearing, where they will be in danger of a spanking and a cost order for unreasonable behaviour.
-
That is just BW Legal acting as a useless debt collector. They will eventually issue an LoC and then a claim. However, for now, you do not need to respond to that letter. When they issue an LoC, let us know and we will provide a suitable response.
I am assuming that the photos you showed us of the car park with no entrance sign are yours. If so, keep them as valuable evidence. Also, you need to extract the metadata and get those photos timestamped with that data. No entrance sign is a clear breach of the CoP and means that no contract cold have been formed with you (the driver, which should never have identified).
Also, do you have the correspondence where they admit that the signs were not there due to vandalism? That is also crucial evidence.
Also, you need to get a close up photo of the sign they say forms the contract. We need to see the wording on it to evaluate if it is even capable of forming a contract.
Will send picture of LOC when received.
The photos are mine. I took them the day I was doing the appeal which was after I received the ticket. I have got the metadata and they're timestamped in and around 23 August 2025 19:11:32.
I'll attach a closer picture of the signs when I'm next there.
But even on google streetview, there are no entrance signs visible. I've attached screenshots of May 2023 and October 2022 from google streetview (latest dates available).
https://ibb.co/sdmCzNy7 (https://ibb.co/sdmCzNy7)
https://ibb.co/tPw3s67y (https://ibb.co/tPw3s67y)
I have attached the response by the operator which I've screen shot from the IAS appeal. It clearly shows that they admit the signs were not there due to vandalism. Suggesting it was the driver that caused this.
https://ibb.co/GvtK2HWs (https://ibb.co/GvtK2HWs)
I've also attached the PDF of the operators proof - which does not include any pictures of the entrance signs.
https://ibb.co/G3JVNcgY (https://ibb.co/G3JVNcgY)
Thank you
-
The letter sent through named me as driver as when I appealed through the IAS it required me to state I was the driver. I am not the keeper of the car and the keeper (a relative) has not received anything through the post.
No Notice to Keeper has been sent to anyone through the post.
Absolutely NOTHING, anywhere, required you to name yourself as the driver, especially if you were not the driver!!!!
No one twisted your arm to state the following in your IAS appeal:
(https://i.ibb.co/TqLVF5mL/Screenshot-2025-12-29-at-10-47-30.png)
So are you suggesting that you were not the driver?
The only reason the Keeper has not received anything through the post is because you admitted to being the driver. ONLY the driver is liable and you were not obliged to admit to being the driver at any point. If you made an initial appeal to the NtD, as the driver, then there is no need for them to engage with the Keeper.
BW Legal will issue a claim and take all the way to a hearing. Your defence will be that no contact was formed because they have not evidenced a period of parking beyond the minimum consideration period that must allow in their CoP and the fact that there w s no entrance sign that notifies drivers that they are entering private land with terms and conditions for parking.
If you show us a close up of the terms and conditions signs, there is probably even more you can use for your defence once the inevitable claim comes through.
-
Hi there,
Just posting this letter I received in the post before I receive the inevitable Letter of Claim they have now threatened to send.
https://ibb.co/VdVHRXD
(https://ibb.co/VdVHRXD)
Hi there,
Just posting this letter I received in the post before I receive the inevitable Letter of Claim they have now threatened to send.
https://ibb.co/VdVHRXD
(https://ibb.co/VdVHRXD)
This is a standard begging debt collectors letter so can safely be ignored.
There appears to be a number of inconsistencies with this case so far which we need to clear up.
Firstly, were you initially issued with a paper Notice to Driver which would have been left on the vehicle at the time of the parking event?
Then, the reminder letter states, 'You have been named as the driver' - Is that true? Are you actually the keeper? How did they find out that you were the driver by the date of the reminder notice?
Thirdly, if you are the keeper then did you ever receive a Notice to Keeper through the post?
I was issued with a paper ticket that I posted in an above post.
The letter sent through named me as driver as when I appealed through the IAS it required me to state I was the driver. I am not the keeper of the car and the keeper (a relative) has not received anything through the post.
No Notice to Keeper has been sent to anyone through the post.
-
That is just BW Legal acting as a useless debt collector. They will eventually issue an LoC and then a claim. However, for now, you do not need to respond to that letter. When they issue an LoC, let us know and we will provide a suitable response.
I am assuming that the photos you showed us of the car park with no entrance sign are yours. If so, keep them as valuable evidence. Also, you need to extract the metadata and get those photos timestamped with that data. No entrance sign is a clear breach of the CoP and means that no contract cold have been formed with you (the driver, which should never have identified).
Also, do you have the correspondence where they admit that the signs were not there due to vandalism? That is also crucial evidence.
Also, you need to get a close up photo of the sign they say forms the contract. We need to see the wording on it to evaluate if it is even capable of forming a contract.
-
Hi there,
Just posting this letter I received in the post before I receive the inevitable Letter of Claim they have now threatened to send.
https://ibb.co/VdVHRXD
(https://ibb.co/VdVHRXD)
This is a standard begging debt collectors letter so can safely be ignored.
There appears to be a number of inconsistencies with this case so far which we need to clear up.
Firstly, were you initially issued with a paper Notice to Driver which would have been left on the vehicle at the time of the parking event?
Then, the reminder letter states, 'You have been named as the driver' - Is that true? Are you actually the keeper? How did they find out that you were the driver by the date of the reminder notice?
Thirdly, if you are the keeper then did you ever receive a Notice to Keeper through the post?
-
Hi there,
Just posting this letter I received in the post before I receive the inevitable Letter of Claim they have now threatened to send.
https://ibb.co/VdVHRXD (https://ibb.co/VdVHRXD)
-
Yeah felt it was a scam straight away.
I will not be paying a penny and will ignore as advised. Thank you.
I don't have the original PCN, but a friend of mine also received the same PCN and I appealed for us both. Here is their original PCN.
(https://i.ibb.co/yFsG9Yx9/PHOTO-2025-08-26-07-48-14.jpg) (https://ibb.co/zVfjM7tM)
-
Oh dear. What a waste of effort you went through to appeal and then the Kangaroo court that is the IAS. You also proverbially blew both feet off with a single shot by identifying the driver. If only you'd come here before any appeals.
For future reference do not ever, EVER identify the driver if you receive a PCN. Only refer to the driver in the third person. No "I did this or that". only "the driver did this or that". Too late for that in this case.
You have nit dsaiow us the original Notice to Keeper (NtK). The reminder is as useful as a poke in that arm with a sharp stick. Does the original NtK state "period of parking"?
The timestamped evidential photos only show a span of a couple of minutes. Not enough time to evidence that any contract was formed with the driver. Their own Code of Practice requires them to give a minimum consideration period of 5 minutes before a PCN can be issued.
Also, their signage is in breach of the CoP.
You are in the midst of a scam. The mendacious IAS appeal rejection is not binding on you. DO NOT pay. If you follow the advice, you won't be paying a penny to these scammers.
FOr now, you can safely ignore all useless debt recovery letters that are going to come your way. Debt collectors are powerless to do anything except to try and intimidate the low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree into paying out of ignorance and fear.
Come back when you receive a Letter of Claim (LoC) and we can take it from there.
-
If you need advice then you must submit your evidence here such as photos of the signage and views of the car park.
The original PPN etc.
Has the drivers ID been given?
Yes it has.
-
I thought I uploaded the links via ImgBB - I've reattached them here:
PCN:
https://ibb.co/Y4fPXhSs (https://ibb.co/Y4fPXhSs)
https://ibb.co/5XBYBNf9 (https://ibb.co/5XBYBNf9)
My appeal with evidence:
https://ibb.co/Kj5VQW13 (https://ibb.co/Kj5VQW13)
Operator's response:
https://ibb.co/RGXQ6Xhv (https://ibb.co/RGXQ6Xhv)
More evidence of no signs on entry:
https://ibb.co/LXSz2Pst (https://ibb.co/LXSz2Pst)
https://ibb.co/LDNndPPc (https://ibb.co/LDNndPPc)
(https://i.ibb.co/nNrs50Kc/Photo1.jpg) (https://ibb.co/LXSz2Pst)
(https://i.ibb.co/kVmQ2yyw/Photo2.jpg) (https://ibb.co/LDNndPPc)
-
If you need advice then you must submit your evidence here such as photos of the signage and views of the car park.
The original PPN etc.
Has the drivers ID been given?
-
Good afternoon,
I received a PCN for parking in Bute Street Cardiff in August.
There was no signage on entry to the space, no signage showing that the space was a private car park or any car parking pay stations anywhere.
There was only small warning private land signs on the walls far from where I parked my vehicle that was pointed out by the operator during the appeal service - but it is incredibly small and obscured by other vehicles as shown by the operators first response to the appeal (attached).
(https://ibb.co/DDP8YM8s)
I went through several rounds of an appeal and evidence sharing through the IAS appeal service. But the appeal was later dismissed. I feel not any of my evidence or grounds for appeal were considered.
I have now received a £100 fine from Link Parking (attached).
(https://ibb.co/pBr8XNDD)
(https://ibb.co/5g9K6Bvn)
I have since searched online and have found that the IAS sides with most car parking operators, which I feel is incredibly unfair.
During one of appeal rounds, the operator had stated that the car park did have entry signs and had since been vandalised - which is untrue and I have proved it with photographs and google street view - linked in my PDF appeal letter and evidence (attached)
(https://ibb.co/XrmGhNv0)
(https://ibb.co/VYjr8KZd)
PDF
(https://ibb.co/k2fhRPCB)
Please let me know what my next steps can be.
I can attached any and all of the operator and adjudicators responses if it helps.
Thank you