1
Private parking tickets / Re: VCS PCN received after store closing hours
« on: June 04, 2026, 01:19:13 pm »
Is there more chance at that point compared to IAS?
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
2
Private parking tickets / Re: VCS PCN received after store closing hours
« on: June 03, 2026, 05:27:56 pm »
What can I do at the "letter before claim" point?
I'm fighting this on behalf of the driver but I really need to weigh out whether it's worth putting them through the stress of all the debt recovery letters...
I'm fighting this on behalf of the driver but I really need to weigh out whether it's worth putting them through the stress of all the debt recovery letters...
3
Private parking tickets / Re: VCS PCN received after store closing hours
« on: June 03, 2026, 04:04:43 pm »
The IAS adjudicator has dismissed the appeal. Is there anything more I can do?
" "The Appellant should understand that the Adjudicator is not in a position to give legal advice to either of the parties, but they are entitled to seek their own independent legal advice. The Adjudicator's role is to consider whether or not the parking charge has a basis in law and was properly issued in the circumstances of each individual case. In all Appeals the Adjudicator is bound by the relevant law applicable at the time and is only able to consider legal challenges and not factual mistakes nor extenuating or mitigating circumstances. Throughout this appeal the Operator has had the opportunity to consider all points raised and could have conceded the appeal at any stage. The Adjudicator who deals with this Appeal is legally qualified and each case is dealt with according to their understanding of the law as it applies, and the legal principles involved. A decision by an Adjudicator is not legally binding on an Appellant who is entitled to seek their own legal advice if they so wish.
In all Appeals the burden of proof is the civil one whereby the party asserting a fact or submission has to establish that matter on the balance of probabilities. If the parking operator fails to establish that a Parking Charge Notice was properly issued in accordance with the law, then it is likely that an Appeal will be allowed. If the parking operator does establish that a Parking Charge Notice was properly and legally issued, then the burden shifts to the Appellant to establish that the notice was improperly or unlawfully issued and if the Appellant proves those matters on the balance of probabilities, then it is likely that the Appeal will be allowed. However, the Appeal will be dismissed if the Appellant fails to establish those matters on the balance of probabilities. The responsibility is at all times on the parties to provide the Adjudicator with the evidential basis upon which to make a decision.
The signs offer the terms for parking. By remaining parked on land managed by the Operator, having had notice of the terms, the driver agrees to them. In consideration for entering the site they agree not to park in a restricted area or pay the charge. In this way they have entered into a contract with the Operator and agreed to be bound by the advertised terms.
I am satisfied that the signs are clear, numerous and unequivocal. This is evidenced by the Operators site map, exhibits and images. The Operator has provided an image of the Appellant's vehicle parked in a restricted area.
Turning to the identity of the driver, POFA 2012 and case law permits the Operator to hold the registered keeper liable for an unpaid parking charge regardless as to whether they are the driver or not.
The Notice to Keeper contains all the required prerequisite information. It is also considered in time unless there is evidence beyond the Appellant's mere assertion that it was received after the second working day. In the absence of such evidence I cannot consider the matter further.
The Appellant has my sympathy, but the guidance to the appeal is clear that I may only consider legal issues not extenuating circumstances. The Operator has this discretion, and they exercised it in the Appellant's favour, by offering the reduced payment. Having rejected this offer the Appellant is now liable to pay the full charge."
" "The Appellant should understand that the Adjudicator is not in a position to give legal advice to either of the parties, but they are entitled to seek their own independent legal advice. The Adjudicator's role is to consider whether or not the parking charge has a basis in law and was properly issued in the circumstances of each individual case. In all Appeals the Adjudicator is bound by the relevant law applicable at the time and is only able to consider legal challenges and not factual mistakes nor extenuating or mitigating circumstances. Throughout this appeal the Operator has had the opportunity to consider all points raised and could have conceded the appeal at any stage. The Adjudicator who deals with this Appeal is legally qualified and each case is dealt with according to their understanding of the law as it applies, and the legal principles involved. A decision by an Adjudicator is not legally binding on an Appellant who is entitled to seek their own legal advice if they so wish.
In all Appeals the burden of proof is the civil one whereby the party asserting a fact or submission has to establish that matter on the balance of probabilities. If the parking operator fails to establish that a Parking Charge Notice was properly issued in accordance with the law, then it is likely that an Appeal will be allowed. If the parking operator does establish that a Parking Charge Notice was properly and legally issued, then the burden shifts to the Appellant to establish that the notice was improperly or unlawfully issued and if the Appellant proves those matters on the balance of probabilities, then it is likely that the Appeal will be allowed. However, the Appeal will be dismissed if the Appellant fails to establish those matters on the balance of probabilities. The responsibility is at all times on the parties to provide the Adjudicator with the evidential basis upon which to make a decision.
The signs offer the terms for parking. By remaining parked on land managed by the Operator, having had notice of the terms, the driver agrees to them. In consideration for entering the site they agree not to park in a restricted area or pay the charge. In this way they have entered into a contract with the Operator and agreed to be bound by the advertised terms.
I am satisfied that the signs are clear, numerous and unequivocal. This is evidenced by the Operators site map, exhibits and images. The Operator has provided an image of the Appellant's vehicle parked in a restricted area.
Turning to the identity of the driver, POFA 2012 and case law permits the Operator to hold the registered keeper liable for an unpaid parking charge regardless as to whether they are the driver or not.
The Notice to Keeper contains all the required prerequisite information. It is also considered in time unless there is evidence beyond the Appellant's mere assertion that it was received after the second working day. In the absence of such evidence I cannot consider the matter further.
The Appellant has my sympathy, but the guidance to the appeal is clear that I may only consider legal issues not extenuating circumstances. The Operator has this discretion, and they exercised it in the Appellant's favour, by offering the reduced payment. Having rejected this offer the Appellant is now liable to pay the full charge."
4
Private parking tickets / Re: VCS PCN received after store closing hours
« on: April 28, 2026, 05:20:23 pm »
I only have 2 days left to respond. Is there anything worthwhile I can say?
5
Private parking tickets / Re: VCS PCN received after store closing hours
« on: April 24, 2026, 12:30:36 am »
I have until 30 April to respond to the operator. Can I also argue that the contravention photos don't prove the parking location, nor that the driver left the site?
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DeFfl8ycuvFOTKkMkIpzA1kxGza3stzZ/view?usp=drivesdk
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WAUePXg73KtA5Nsk37XePACIJd89d8iK/view?usp=drivesdk
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DeFfl8ycuvFOTKkMkIpzA1kxGza3stzZ/view?usp=drivesdk
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WAUePXg73KtA5Nsk37XePACIJd89d8iK/view?usp=drivesdk
6
Private parking tickets / Re: VCS PCN received after store closing hours
« on: April 24, 2026, 12:26:53 am »
The operator made their Prima Facie Case on 23/04/2026 15:03:37.
The operator reported that...
The appellant was the keeper.
The operator is seeking keeper liability in accordance with PoFA..
The Notice to Keeper (Non-ANPR) was sent on 10/03/2026.
The ticket was issued on 10/03/2026.
The charge is based in Contract.
The operator made the following comments...
1. Unit 1, Topps Tiles is a private Car Park which motorists are allowed to enter for the purpose of access and to park their vehicle as long as they abide by any Terms and Conditions displayed.
2. The signage where the appellant parked their vehicle onsite states: ‘Topps Tiles Customer Parking Only Whilst on the Premises Park Wholly Within the Lines of a Single Marked Bay'. The signage makes it clear that any motorist parking in contravention of the terms and conditions will be liable for a PCN.
3. Site Photographs supplied show that the signage is appropriately within the car park. The adjudicator will note that the VCS signage onsite, including its wording and positioning has been audited by the IPC, has passed audit, complies with the Code of Practice and is deemed fit for purpose.
4. Enforcement for parking contraventions at this car site is undertaken by patrol officers who use a Hand Held Terminal (HHT) to record details of any vehicle and its registration number, which may be parked in contravention of the advertised Terms & Conditions. Those images and other relevant information are uploaded in real time to a secure portal, where the information is reviewed. No formal Parking Charge Notice is affixed to the vehicle; instead, a Notice to Keeper is subsequently issued by post, this practice falls in line with the process and procedures as per site management using ANPR technology.
5. As registered keeper, we are holding the appellant liable for the Charge Notice under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, details of which were explained in the formal Notice sent on 05/03/2026. We note that the appellant has also declined to name the driver of their vehicle at the time of the incident in question. It is important that we make the adjudicator aware that we will rely on the keeper liability provisions within Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) and as such, do not require those details.
6. The NTK is PoFA compliant.
7. The design, wording and layout of the NTK comply with our industry's Single Code of Practice.
8. A series of images were taken showing the location of the vehicle in relation to the signs on site, they are time and date stamped and show the appellant's vehicle parked adjacent to at least one of the warning signs.
9. The Patrol Officer (PO) observed the appellant's vehicle in situ. When digitally recording the contravention the PO noted, ‘Contra 81. parked in topps tiles parking and went to the mosque.'
10. Contravention photographs supplied, which are time and date stamped, show the appellant's vehicle parked in situ for over a minute, in close proximity to VCS contractual signage.
11. As the driver was observed leaving the site, they ceased to be a customer on the premises. The appellant's vehicle was therefore parked contrary to the Terms and Conditions of parking during this time. No evidence has been presented that contests the PO's statement.
12. A grace period would normally be allowed on a car park in respect of vehicles which are permitted to park; however in this case, as the driver was observed to leave the premises, the vehicle was not permitted to park where it did and no grace period was applicable.
13. The contract between the appellant and VCS was formed when the motorist entered the site. When entering this private land, a motorist freely enters into an agreement to abide by the conditions advertised in return for permission to enter. It is the motorist's responsibility to ensure that they abide by any clearly displayed terms and conditions; otherwise the motorist would face liability for a Charge Notice.
14. The appellant had no cause to believe that they could park onsite when they were not a Topps Tiles' customer.
15. It is the motorist's responsibility to ensure that they are familiar with the Terms and Conditions displayed on the signage in private land on which they park. We maintain that our signs are clearly visible and meet the requirements set by the International Parking Community guidelines. As established members of the International Parking Community, we adhere to their Code of Practice. This Code of Practice gives recommendations in regards to the signage within the car park. The signs within the car park fully comply with the recommendations outlined in the Code of Practice and are therefore deemed reasonable. At the time of the contravention the vehicle would have been using headlights. Headlights would have illuminated our signage, which is reflective for this purpose. Once the presence of the signs is revealed, it is the motorist's responsibility to ensure that they have read the signs and are familiar with the Terms and Conditions before leaving their vehicle parked in situ.
16. A helpline telephone number (open 24 hours per day) is clearly displayed on all VCS signage for any motorist experiencing difficulty or who has any questions or concerns. This was not utilised by the motorist. If the terms and conditions were in any way unclear to the motorist, or they were unsure if they applied to them, they had the option of contacting us for advice.
17. We maintain that the terms and conditions were sufficiently brought to the appellant's attention at the time of the parking event.
18. By parking in an area for customers of Topps Tiles only whilst not a customer, the appellant became liable for this charge as per the displayed Terms and Conditions.
The operator reported that...
The appellant was the keeper.
The operator is seeking keeper liability in accordance with PoFA..
The Notice to Keeper (Non-ANPR) was sent on 10/03/2026.
The ticket was issued on 10/03/2026.
The charge is based in Contract.
The operator made the following comments...
1. Unit 1, Topps Tiles is a private Car Park which motorists are allowed to enter for the purpose of access and to park their vehicle as long as they abide by any Terms and Conditions displayed.
2. The signage where the appellant parked their vehicle onsite states: ‘Topps Tiles Customer Parking Only Whilst on the Premises Park Wholly Within the Lines of a Single Marked Bay'. The signage makes it clear that any motorist parking in contravention of the terms and conditions will be liable for a PCN.
3. Site Photographs supplied show that the signage is appropriately within the car park. The adjudicator will note that the VCS signage onsite, including its wording and positioning has been audited by the IPC, has passed audit, complies with the Code of Practice and is deemed fit for purpose.
4. Enforcement for parking contraventions at this car site is undertaken by patrol officers who use a Hand Held Terminal (HHT) to record details of any vehicle and its registration number, which may be parked in contravention of the advertised Terms & Conditions. Those images and other relevant information are uploaded in real time to a secure portal, where the information is reviewed. No formal Parking Charge Notice is affixed to the vehicle; instead, a Notice to Keeper is subsequently issued by post, this practice falls in line with the process and procedures as per site management using ANPR technology.
5. As registered keeper, we are holding the appellant liable for the Charge Notice under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, details of which were explained in the formal Notice sent on 05/03/2026. We note that the appellant has also declined to name the driver of their vehicle at the time of the incident in question. It is important that we make the adjudicator aware that we will rely on the keeper liability provisions within Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) and as such, do not require those details.
6. The NTK is PoFA compliant.
7. The design, wording and layout of the NTK comply with our industry's Single Code of Practice.
8. A series of images were taken showing the location of the vehicle in relation to the signs on site, they are time and date stamped and show the appellant's vehicle parked adjacent to at least one of the warning signs.
9. The Patrol Officer (PO) observed the appellant's vehicle in situ. When digitally recording the contravention the PO noted, ‘Contra 81. parked in topps tiles parking and went to the mosque.'
10. Contravention photographs supplied, which are time and date stamped, show the appellant's vehicle parked in situ for over a minute, in close proximity to VCS contractual signage.
11. As the driver was observed leaving the site, they ceased to be a customer on the premises. The appellant's vehicle was therefore parked contrary to the Terms and Conditions of parking during this time. No evidence has been presented that contests the PO's statement.
12. A grace period would normally be allowed on a car park in respect of vehicles which are permitted to park; however in this case, as the driver was observed to leave the premises, the vehicle was not permitted to park where it did and no grace period was applicable.
13. The contract between the appellant and VCS was formed when the motorist entered the site. When entering this private land, a motorist freely enters into an agreement to abide by the conditions advertised in return for permission to enter. It is the motorist's responsibility to ensure that they abide by any clearly displayed terms and conditions; otherwise the motorist would face liability for a Charge Notice.
14. The appellant had no cause to believe that they could park onsite when they were not a Topps Tiles' customer.
15. It is the motorist's responsibility to ensure that they are familiar with the Terms and Conditions displayed on the signage in private land on which they park. We maintain that our signs are clearly visible and meet the requirements set by the International Parking Community guidelines. As established members of the International Parking Community, we adhere to their Code of Practice. This Code of Practice gives recommendations in regards to the signage within the car park. The signs within the car park fully comply with the recommendations outlined in the Code of Practice and are therefore deemed reasonable. At the time of the contravention the vehicle would have been using headlights. Headlights would have illuminated our signage, which is reflective for this purpose. Once the presence of the signs is revealed, it is the motorist's responsibility to ensure that they have read the signs and are familiar with the Terms and Conditions before leaving their vehicle parked in situ.
16. A helpline telephone number (open 24 hours per day) is clearly displayed on all VCS signage for any motorist experiencing difficulty or who has any questions or concerns. This was not utilised by the motorist. If the terms and conditions were in any way unclear to the motorist, or they were unsure if they applied to them, they had the option of contacting us for advice.
17. We maintain that the terms and conditions were sufficiently brought to the appellant's attention at the time of the parking event.
18. By parking in an area for customers of Topps Tiles only whilst not a customer, the appellant became liable for this charge as per the displayed Terms and Conditions.
7
Private parking tickets / Re: VCS PCN received after store closing hours
« on: April 21, 2026, 03:48:35 pm »
Actual submitted appeal:
I appeal on the grounds that the notice to keeper sent violates PoFA schedule 4, 9(2)(a) and 9(2)(f) by omitting the period of parking and failing to specify: "(if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met)". Thus, it can not be deemed that a notice to keeper was correctly served and no charges can subsequently be levied. I request for the charges to be withdrawn. Thank you
I have provided extracts from PoFA schedule 4 below:
"9(1)A notice which is to be relied on as a notice to keeper for the purposes of paragraph 6(1)(b) is given in accordance with this paragraph if the following requirements are met.
(2)The notice must—
(a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;"
"(f)warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given
(i)the amount of the unpaid parking charges specified under paragraph (d) has not been paid in full, and
(ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver,
the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid"
I appeal on the grounds that the notice to keeper sent violates PoFA schedule 4, 9(2)(a) and 9(2)(f) by omitting the period of parking and failing to specify: "(if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met)". Thus, it can not be deemed that a notice to keeper was correctly served and no charges can subsequently be levied. I request for the charges to be withdrawn. Thank you
I have provided extracts from PoFA schedule 4 below:
"9(1)A notice which is to be relied on as a notice to keeper for the purposes of paragraph 6(1)(b) is given in accordance with this paragraph if the following requirements are met.
(2)The notice must—
(a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;"
"(f)warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given
(i)the amount of the unpaid parking charges specified under paragraph (d) has not been paid in full, and
(ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver,
the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid"
8
Private parking tickets / Re: VCS PCN received after store closing hours
« on: April 21, 2026, 11:03:11 am »
Draft to IAS (feedback requested)
I appeal to you on the grounds that the notice to keeper sent violates PoFA schedule 4, 9(2)(a) and 9(2)(f) by omitting the period of parking and failing to specify: "(if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met)".
I would also hasten to add that the contravention is alleged to have occurred outside of store opening hours thus there is no possibility of any detriment having been caused to the landowner.
For these reasons I kindly request that you overrule the charge. Thank you
I appeal to you on the grounds that the notice to keeper sent violates PoFA schedule 4, 9(2)(a) and 9(2)(f) by omitting the period of parking and failing to specify: "(if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met)".
I would also hasten to add that the contravention is alleged to have occurred outside of store opening hours thus there is no possibility of any detriment having been caused to the landowner.
For these reasons I kindly request that you overrule the charge. Thank you
9
Private parking tickets / Re: VCS PCN received after store closing hours
« on: April 10, 2026, 11:20:32 pm »
VCS Appeal rejection letter now received.
Do I appeal to IAS on the same grounds?
https://drive.google.com/file/d/15nxB2Y57vwuU3Xoiu_Dmo1eInxhkHxen/view?usp=drivesdk
Do I appeal to IAS on the same grounds?
https://drive.google.com/file/d/15nxB2Y57vwuU3Xoiu_Dmo1eInxhkHxen/view?usp=drivesdk
10
Private parking tickets / Re: VCS PCN received after store closing hours
« on: March 27, 2026, 02:50:42 pm »
Brilliant!
Great to have eagle eyed pro's like you on our side
Cheers
Great to have eagle eyed pro's like you on our side
Cheers
11
Private parking tickets / Re: VCS PCN received after store closing hours
« on: March 27, 2026, 02:38:34 pm »
Thanks. I would've thought they covered 9(2)(f) in the last paragraph of page 1 of the NTK. What's missing?
I can't see any mention of POFA on that PCN full stop. Don't identify the driver and appeal on the basis they can't legally hold the keeper liable as they haven't complied with any of the terms of POFA.
There's no actually requirement for the PCN to mention PoFA in it's wording although I accept many PCNs do specifically mention PoFA.
Normally, non PoFA PCNs from VCS contain wording which states "we can pursue the keeper under the reasonable assumption that the keeper was the driver" or words to the effect.
To me it is unclear weather they are relying on PoFA.
But the notice is missing some key wording from para 9(2)(f).
12
Private parking tickets / VCS PCN received after store closing hours
« on: March 26, 2026, 05:35:04 pm »
Hi everyone,
My cousin thought it was safe to use the Topps Tiles car park after store closing hours
. The store have said they can't cancel it as it was outside of their operating times.
The PCN was only passed on to me today and 16 days have passed. What's the best route to appeal?
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/156va0NhCWbrev19DeBrmoaYNnJCw2zrW
PCN here:
My cousin thought it was safe to use the Topps Tiles car park after store closing hours
. The store have said they can't cancel it as it was outside of their operating times.The PCN was only passed on to me today and 16 days have passed. What's the best route to appeal?
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/156va0NhCWbrev19DeBrmoaYNnJCw2zrW
PCN here:
13
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: TFL Bus lane PCN at A13 Beckton exit
« on: February 02, 2026, 02:18:09 pm »
Is queries@londontribunals.org.uk the correct email?
They will accept e mail.
14
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: TFL Bus lane PCN at A13 Beckton exit
« on: January 29, 2026, 11:13:40 am »
Letter from ETA received today. Apparently we need to substantiate our witness statement and produce the original representation! 🤦🏻♂️
https://drive.google.com/file/d/108VGBY4aFDBPcW1Trd6P5cwTArUIux1q/view?usp=drivesdk
https://drive.google.com/file/d/108VGBY4aFDBPcW1Trd6P5cwTArUIux1q/view?usp=drivesdk
15
Civil penalty charge notices (Councils, TFL and so on) / Re: TFL Bus lane PCN at A13 Beckton exit
« on: January 29, 2026, 09:42:04 am »
Please kindly advise. Cheers
Are the OFR/TEC-statement amongst the dossier of documents listed here?
If not, then should I expect them prior to the adjudication?
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-sXSEqHsAbGHdAtJp-ZFKqjSYsaSzN2C/view?usp=drivesdk