Free Traffic Legal Advice

The lease includes three parking spaces.

We'd need to see the exact wording of your lease in relation to parking.

As this is, at this stage, a dispute between you and your landlord, rather than a case concerning the issuing of a private parking charge, it may be slightly outside the knowledge/expertise of this part of the forum, and given the likely severe impact this seems like it would have on your business, it may be worth seeking professional advice.

The Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 would be relevant as it primarily governs commercial leases, particularly regarding security of tenure and renewal of leases. You could look at the following areas of law and regulations:

Leasehold Covenants: Your lease agreement will be the primary document governing the relationship between you and your landlord. The landlord cannot generally unilaterally impose significant changes without your agreement unless the lease allows it. The implied covenant of "quiet enjoyment" in leases also protects tenants from unreasonable interference with their use of the premises, which could extend to parking arrangements.

Unfair Terms in Contracts (Consumer Rights Act 2015): While this act mainly applies to consumer contracts, it may indirectly be relevant if the landlord is imposing terms unilaterally that could be considered unreasonable or significantly disadvantageous to your business use of the premises. However, this is more relevant for small businesses if the lease terms are particularly unfair.

Property and Contract Law: If your lease explicitly or implicitly grants you parking spaces, the landlord would likely need your consent to alter your ability to use those spaces, especially if it adversely impacts your business. If the introduction of ANPR and restricted registration lists substantially affects your use of the premises, you may have a claim under contract law for breach of the lease terms.

The Law of Nuisance: If the landlord’s actions in restricting parking prevent you from accessing your premises or carrying out your normal business operations, this could give rise to a claim for nuisance, though this would typically apply in more extreme cases where your rights under the lease are being seriously obstructed.

The Common Law Right to Quiet Enjoyment: Even without an express clause in the lease, this is implied in most leases. If the parking restrictions seriously affect your ability to access your premises or run your business, it could constitute a breach of this right. It obliges the landlord not to interfere substantially with your use of the premises.

In this situation, the introduction of ANPR cameras and the restrictions imposed by the landlord appear to be a significant change to the terms under which you use your premises, particularly regarding parking. Here are a few things you should consider:

Review Your Lease: Check your lease agreement carefully to see if the landlord has the right to impose such changes. If the lease specifies that you have three parking spaces without restrictions, the new rules may constitute a variation of the lease terms. Any material change might require your consent.

Lack of Consultation: If the changes are significant, the landlord should ideally consult with tenants before implementing them. The fact that this was done without consultation could be unreasonable, especially if it hinders your ability to operate your business.

Raise Formal Objections: If you haven't already, it might be worth raising a formal, written objection to the landlord. Explain how the restrictions would negatively impact your business, including the issues with company vehicles and staff rotation.

Propose a Practical Solution: Given that you never use more than three spaces, you could propose a solution such as a rotating whitelist or a permit system that allows for flexible registration changes. You could also suggest exemptions for company vehicles that are stored on-site.

Consult Legal Advice: If the landlord remains unresponsive, seeking legal advice would be wise, particularly to understand your rights under the lease. If the changes are unreasonable or unworkable, you may be able to challenge them formally.

Has your landlord been duped by Bank Parking (ex-clamper thugs) into believing that there is a parking problem when none exists? This is how these vermin operate. They bamboozle landlords into believing there is problem and offer a free solution. They then start issuing PCNs as that is the only "income" they get to cover their expenditure on ANPR and signs. Before you know it, all the businesses and any retailers on the site notice their business dwindling as people stop using the location. It is highly likely that delivery drivers such as Amazon and others eventually blacklist the location once they have received a few PCNs.

Have no doubt that Bank Parking will run amok as soon as they are allowed to operate on the site. They will not hesitate to issue PCNs to as many victims as they can until they bleed the site dry. You have been warned.

Thanks for some good replies! I'm digging the lease out, but from memory it describes our entitlement to park three personal vehicles in an area marked out on the map. The area marked out describes the entire 100m rear car park behind our building. There's another similar sized car park in front of the building, an various stuff elsewhere.
Knowing that 3 vehicles would be "tight", In queries to this before taking on the lease, the landlord stated in writing that we can also park additional vehicles elsewhere on site but as a first come first served basis, and that the three spaces behind the building are the only ones we're entitled to.
That bit wasn't in the lease, though, unfortunately.

I have finally got a response from the landlord, as have other tenants. It very much appears that Bank Park are pulling the strings here as the LL is "asking the questions" to Bank Park about it all.


I've formally raised my objections and concerns, and asked why there was no consultation whatsoever on something that so dramatically changes the way the business park operates - Yesterdays email is the first anyone had heard of it!


Good call on the legal advice - We're a member of the FSB so I've got a free consultation call with them scheduled for first thing in the morning. I'll keep you updated.

Thankfully no cameras have been installed on site yet, but they are giving 27th September as a deadline. Presumably to sneak in before October 1st to get round the new legislation?

What new "legislation" is that?

It's not something that your landlord has been conned into believing from Bank Park Management is it? Are they perhaps trying to beat the deadline for their new join BPA/IPC Code of Practice (CoP) which would require them to modify all their signs if installed after that date?

Be fully aware and make sure your landlord is also, the BPA and the IPC are not able to "legislate" anything. What they are trying to do, is hoodwink the vast majority of people, including MPs, that the Joint BPA/IPC CoP is going to become legislation. Nothing could be more mendacious.

There is a stalled Private Parking (Code of Practice) Act 2019 that is, hopefully, going to become enacted late this year or early next year. It has come about because of the rogue practice of these cowboys and scammers (Hansard) and was only temporarily withdrawn because of lobbying by the BPA and the IPC because they are running scared. When this new )real) "legislation" in enacted, we should see the worst offenders of these vermin that infest private car parks disappear.

It just sounds as though BPM are continuing in the same sleazy way and are about to con your landlord into signing an agreement with them that will be the end of yours and everyone else's business at that location. They will have lied about any "perceived" parking problems and your landlord sounds as though he/she has fallen for their lies and deception.

If your landlord is easily persuaded to enter into an agreement with ex-clamper thugs, he/she should be reminded that they will be jointly and severally liable for the actions of their agent (BPM) and are putting their own livelihood at risk not only by that liability but also of their revenue when they realise the their existing tenants go out of business and their revenue dries up.

Remember Wilko? Big national chain that went bust a year or so ago? Believe it or not, they had a contract with one of these vermin unregulated private parking companies. Because of these scammers, they started losing customers because once each motorist had received a £100 PCN for some minor infringement, the stopped shopping there. Not only them but their friends and family too. It was insidious but played a huge part in the failure of this huge firm.

Another consideration to throw into the mix, as an aside to the other advice already provided (and I do still think professional advice may be wise) - if they do bring in a parking firm, try to ensure that any contract your landlord signs allows them to get the operator to cancel any charges without penalty.

There are some terrible contracts signed by landowners that essentially sign them up to contracts where a parking company can issue charges, but the landlord either cannot instruct them to cancel, or has to pay some sort of fee to do so.

Also a fair warning, if Bank Park do end up operating on the site, they can be a stubborn bunch, and do take people to court over unpaid PCNs.

Sorry, should have been a bit clearer.
I was pointing out to the landlord that the camera operators return on investment would be very poor if they operated purely in good faith as they claim to: ~£200 a week for a few months of the year won't even cover the cost once the admin and upkeep of the systems are factored in

"Oooh, err I'll have to ask Bank Park about that one".

That sounds like the tail wagging the dog. It's his land, and yet he's seemingly happy to let a third party dictate to him the conditions by which vehicles can access it.