Show Posts
1
Private parking tickets / Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd (‘PCM’) - No Permit - Watford
« on: Yesterday at 08:11:46 pm »
Hi all, haven't posted on here since it was PePiPoo! Glad the community is still going strong.
Wondering next steps on this bad boy:
No gate, no barrier to enter. Night time with no lighting on the signs, incorrect vehicle details. Challenged and now being told I must provide driver details...
PCN details:
Date 19/12/2025
Time 23:57
Make JAGUAR
Colour Red
Was seen in Astra Court (1-36) & Solar Court (1-24) - WD18
Contravention Parked without clearly displaying a valid PCM UK Ltd permit (at time of enforcement).
Location:
https://ibb.co/VpCqMxkW
Google Maps Link
Some of the photos in their official evidence(there are more of the car but don't provide much value:
https://ibb.co/zHxJXrtz
https://ibb.co/Kzq83WQh
https://ibb.co/KjLYQ1NW
https://ibb.co/R4sFCsHh
Initial appeal was along these lines (ChatGPT, sorry):
PCN reference: xxxxxxx
Vehicle registration: xxxxxxx
I am the registered keeper of the above vehicle and I dispute this charge.
The driver arrived and parked during hours of darkness. The signage relied upon by the operator was not visible or legible at the time of parking and therefore no contract was formed.
In the operator’s own photographs, the alleged contractual sign is mounted high on a brick wall, well above normal driver eye-level and outside a driver’s natural line of sight when parking. The sign is not positioned at bay level, at the entrance, or in any location a driver would reasonably be expected to look when manoeuvring into a parking space.
Crucially, the operator’s images rely on the use of powerful camera flash to illuminate both the wall and the sign. This artificially enhances visibility and does not reflect real-world conditions at the time of parking. There is no evidence of any external lighting illuminating the sign, nor is it reflective. Without flash, the sign blends into the brickwork and is not readable in darkness.
The presence of bay markings or a generic “Private Parking” notice does not communicate any contractual terms, restrictions, or parking charge and cannot form a contract on their own. Any alleged contract must therefore rely solely on the wall-mounted sign, which was not adequately brought to the driver’s attention at night.
As the IPC Code of Practice requires signage to be clearly visible, readable, and prominent at the time of parking, the operator has failed to meet this requirement. Accordingly, no contract was formed with the driver.
In addition, the Parking Charge Notice contains an incorrect vehicle description, which further calls into question the accuracy and reliability of the operator’s evidence.
For the avoidance of doubt, I am appealing as the registered keeper. I am under no obligation to identify the driver and will not be doing so.
I require this charge to be cancelled.
Response:
Page 1: https://ibb.co/wrcdpFFr
Page 2: https://ibb.co/bjwNfwTn
Wondering next steps on this bad boy:
No gate, no barrier to enter. Night time with no lighting on the signs, incorrect vehicle details. Challenged and now being told I must provide driver details...
PCN details:
Date 19/12/2025
Time 23:57
Make JAGUAR
Colour Red
Was seen in Astra Court (1-36) & Solar Court (1-24) - WD18
Contravention Parked without clearly displaying a valid PCM UK Ltd permit (at time of enforcement).
Location:
https://ibb.co/VpCqMxkW
Google Maps Link
Some of the photos in their official evidence(there are more of the car but don't provide much value:
https://ibb.co/zHxJXrtz
https://ibb.co/Kzq83WQh
https://ibb.co/KjLYQ1NW
https://ibb.co/R4sFCsHh
Initial appeal was along these lines (ChatGPT, sorry):
PCN reference: xxxxxxx
Vehicle registration: xxxxxxx
I am the registered keeper of the above vehicle and I dispute this charge.
The driver arrived and parked during hours of darkness. The signage relied upon by the operator was not visible or legible at the time of parking and therefore no contract was formed.
In the operator’s own photographs, the alleged contractual sign is mounted high on a brick wall, well above normal driver eye-level and outside a driver’s natural line of sight when parking. The sign is not positioned at bay level, at the entrance, or in any location a driver would reasonably be expected to look when manoeuvring into a parking space.
Crucially, the operator’s images rely on the use of powerful camera flash to illuminate both the wall and the sign. This artificially enhances visibility and does not reflect real-world conditions at the time of parking. There is no evidence of any external lighting illuminating the sign, nor is it reflective. Without flash, the sign blends into the brickwork and is not readable in darkness.
The presence of bay markings or a generic “Private Parking” notice does not communicate any contractual terms, restrictions, or parking charge and cannot form a contract on their own. Any alleged contract must therefore rely solely on the wall-mounted sign, which was not adequately brought to the driver’s attention at night.
As the IPC Code of Practice requires signage to be clearly visible, readable, and prominent at the time of parking, the operator has failed to meet this requirement. Accordingly, no contract was formed with the driver.
In addition, the Parking Charge Notice contains an incorrect vehicle description, which further calls into question the accuracy and reliability of the operator’s evidence.
For the avoidance of doubt, I am appealing as the registered keeper. I am under no obligation to identify the driver and will not be doing so.
I require this charge to be cancelled.
Response:
Page 1: https://ibb.co/wrcdpFFr
Page 2: https://ibb.co/bjwNfwTn