Show Posts - LJO12

Great, thank you.Do UKPC/similar organisations not always provide a POPLA code? What would be the ramifications if they didn't?If you don't mind explaining, what part of the Protection of Freedoms Act doesn't the NtK comply with? I am looking up schedule 4  online atm.

No, I was unaware of how CCJ's are issued. Thank you for that information, it is very helpful and puts my mind at ease for the driver.How would be best to proceed with the appeal to UKPC? Should the inadequate signage be mentioned?Thanks again!

Thank you for the quick response!Would you say that the signage is inadequate in this specific example (based on the photos provided)?I understand what you mean about the initial appeal being rejected, however my concern is what happens with the CCJ. Is there a chance it can be held against the registered keeper long term and affect credit scores or anything like that?Any additional help or wording would be appreciated yes, I find the invoice charge ridiculous.Thanks again!

On 23/1/25 I received a letter in the post addressed to me, as the registered keeper of the vehicle, which stated that a driver of the vehicle was recorded on private property in a McDonalds car park (on 20/1/25) and overstayed from the allowed time limit of 1 hour 30 mins, staying for a total of 3 hours and 5 minutes. UKPC want to charge £50 if paid within 14 days or £100 if paid within 28 days for this 'breach' of apparent terms and conditions that the driver agreed to when parked on private land.The driver of the vehicle was unaware that McDonalds car parks had limits to stay, and did not and does not agree to any terms and conditions for a contract that was not made explicitly and extremely clear. As they entered the car park just before 18:00 it was already dark (and raining) they missed the signage due to the conditions. The driver went back to take pictures of the car park and noticed that some signage was visible (to be fair) whereas other signage was slightly less than visible (placed on an angle to the entrance, slightly obscured by trees further down). Additionally, there is some construction work going on right now at the entrance of the McDonalds car park (as seen in photos) however the driver cannot recall whether the construction work was ongoing at the time of the offence and whether that would have potentially obscured the signage at that time. As you can see on the photos provided by the company on entrance and exit, it's completely pitch black and only the lights of the car are visible.The driver of the vehicle was a customer at the McDonalds and can provide bank statements etc if that helps the case.Photos of both the PCN and the car park have been attached. Also, here is an imgur link with some extra photos of the McDonalds car park due to post restrictions: https://imgur.com/a/NhXMl2XJust wondering whether a case for an appeal can be made here or whether the driver is out of luck and should pay the lower priced £50 charge instead? The driver has never had a PCN before and doesn't want to be harassed by debt collectors etc and has no real idea of what could happen.Any and all help would be appreciated with this.Cheers! [ Guests cannot view attachments ]