-
Bank Parking - compensation for ticket being issued incorrectly.
Posted by Kharas1 on 10 Sep, 2025 16:13 -
I am helping someone who received a PCN from Bank Parking.
They had already purchased in advance the parking but then subsequently Bank issued a PCN to them.
Having complained and appealed to Bank, we now hold confirmation that the notice has been cancelled, although it doesn’t specify why or acknowledge that parking had already been paid for.
However this clearly should never have been issued in the first place had Bank been even vaguely competent.
An admin fee has been incurred from the Vehicle Hire Company to provide the necessary details to enable Bank to contact the hirer. In addition it has taken time and effort to deal both with the vehicle hire company and subsequently the morons at Bank Parking, when none of this should have been necessary.
We would welcome any thoughts on the best route and tactics to seek compensation from Bank as to cover actual costs as well as for the time and inconvenience of their incompetence.
This has become a bit of a point of principle now so absolutely not adverse to taking this through to the small claims court if appropriate. -
-
We'll need some more context. Was this cancelled at the initial appeal stage?
We will also need to see the terms and conditions of the hire agreement that the hire firm are using to levy their admin fee, and confirmation of how much that fee is.
In a lot of cases we see, the admin fee is either arguably not due at all based on the wording of the the bids agreement. If that is the case, any recourse in regards to the admin fee would likely be against the hire firm rather than Bank. -
-
Here are your realistic options and the best order to try them.
Option 1: Recover the admin fee from the hire/lease company. We need to see the exact wording of the hire agreement about “PCNs”, as opposed to “traffic offences” or “fines/penalties”. A private parking charge is a speculative invoice from an unregulated company, not a fine and not a traffic offence. If the clause only mentions “fines”, “penalties”, “traffic offences” or similar, the admin fee is likely outside the contract and should be refunded. Cite the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (fairness and transparency of terms) and unjust enrichment. Ask for a full refund of the admin fee within 14 days. If their terms expressly allow an admin fee for “PCNs/parking charges”, then challenge reasonableness and proof of work: request their contemporaneous log of actions taken, any documents sent, and a VAT invoice. If they paid anything to the operator instead of simply naming the hirer, demand that back as well because they should have transferred liability, not pay private invoices.
Option 2: Ask Bank Parking to reimburse your losses caused by their error. Write a short letter before claim explaining that parking was pre-paid, their PCN was issued without due diligence, it was later cancelled, and this caused foreseeable losses (the hire company’s admin fee plus incidental out-of-pocket costs). Require reimbursement within 14 days and enclose proof: the pre-purchase, the cancellation, and the hire company’s invoice. Keep the claim to actual, provable losses; courts rarely award anything for time and inconvenience unless pursued as a data protection distress claim (see Option 3).
Option 3: Consider a small claim for UK GDPR/Data Protection Act distress and loss, but only if you have a solid basis. This route turns on whether Bank lacked “reasonable cause” to process your data and/or failed to check their own payment records before issuing the PCN. If they could and should have seen the valid session, you can argue unlawful processing and seek modest damages for distress plus your admin fee as loss flowing from the breach. To evaluate this properly, send a subject access request to Bank Parking for: the VRM payment/whitelist logs, ANPR hits, their internal audit trail for the PCN, DVLA request/response timestamps, and the reason recorded for cancellation.
Option 4: Escalate complaints. If the hire firm is a BVRLA member, use the BVRLA conciliation service if they refuse a refund. You can also complain to the DVLA if Bank requested keeper data without reasonable cause, and to the operator’s trade association about failure to exercise due diligence. These are leverage points even if they don’t directly pay you.
Evidence to gather now: the hire/lease agreement (full wording of any clause about PCNs, fines, penalties, offences, admin charges), the admin fee invoice and proof of payment, the pre-purchase confirmation, the operator’s cancellation email/letter, and a simple chronology.
If you must issue a claim, the simpler target is often the hire company for the admin fee if their contract wording doesn’t clearly cover private PCNs. If their wording does cover PCNs, pivot to Bank Parking for reimbursement of the admin fee as a reasonably foreseeable loss caused by their admitted error. Keep quantum modest and provable. Note that small-claims costs are limited; you won’t recover general “time spent”, but you can recover the issue fee and capped hearing costs if you win.
Please share the exact hire/lease clause dealing with charges, “PCNs”, “fines”, “penalties”, “traffic offences”, and any “admin/processing fees”, so we can decide whether to pursue the hire firm for a straight refund or focus the pre-action letter on Bank Parking. -
-
As an addition to the above - it is also worth us 100% confirming that there was no error on the part of the PCN recipient. We've seen similar cases where upon inspection, they have made a minor error when paying for the parking, making an error inputting the reg (BA12 CDE instead of AB12 CDE for example). I'm not accusing your friend/associate of doing anything wrong here, but let's rule it out before anyone considers issuing court claims.
-
-
Thank you both for some very good advice and guidance at this stage, let me do some further research on the points raised, including checking that the original payment of the parking charge is entirely valid.
-
-
This is an update on what I know so far.
This is the clause (9n) that deals with the admin charge that has been applied.
“It may be that your possession or use of the Vehicle leads to fees,
fines (including speeding, parking and congestion charge fines) or other
sums or liabilities being referred to us. If so, we may charge you an
administration fee as shown in the Key Information section of this
agreement for each referral. We may (but need not unless we are legally
required to do so) choose to pay these amounts if you have not paid
them. If we do so, you agree to reimburse us for the amounts we pay. We
will charge you a further fee as shown in the Key Information section of
this agreement] for each charge we pay.”
The admin charge is £10, which has somewhat surprised me as I was expecting more tbh.
I haven’t got it to upload yet but the invoice recharging it is headed - “ Motoring Offences Invoice” and the invoice is described as “ motoring offences/fines - issued by Bank Parking Management Ltd”.
The payment of the parking in advance seems to check out, correct date/time/location and Reg as the PCN subsequently issued by Bank, but clearly well worth a check.
-
-
So the bottom line is £10 to the Vehicle Hire Company only?
-
-
Assuming no practical way of a broader claim for inconvenience and time wasting, that is the only clearly identifiable and evidenced cost identified to date.
-
-
25 words meaning “yes”!
-
-
I’m practicing being able to charge by the word😆
-
-
Going back to b789's options...
Option 1: You would potentially have a case (the charge is neither an offence nor fine. One could argue parking charges fall into the "other fees" bit, but that's rather vague). However, your friend may wish to consider how much of his time and effort it is worth expending in the pursuit of £10 if the hire company prove stubborn.
Option 2: If we take the view that the admin charge should not have been charged (on the basis of the above), then Option 2 would seem to be a non-starter. If the hire company's fee was not due under the contract with them, that's their error, not Bank's.
Option 3: Unchanged subject to the existing discussion
Option 4: As per option 1 essentially. -
-
Who was the parking booked with? Your Parking Space for example have an unpleasent habit of taking payments for car parks that they don't have a relationship with the enforcement company on. They often rely on the motorist validatng their pre paid parking which is pretty unfair and counter intuitive.
-
-
All good advice so far. Here is my assessment of the clause you have shown us:
The wording is deliberately broad. It covers “fines (including speeding, parking and congestion charge fines) or other sums or liabilities” and allows an admin fee “for each referral”. That will usually catch a private parking charge, because (a) it is an “other sum or liability”, and (b) all they’ve done is refer your details to the operator.
The bracketed examples (“speeding, parking and congestion charge fines”) point to statutory penalties, not private invoices. That creates ambiguity: “parking fines” in UK law are issued by councils/authorities, whereas Bank Parking Management Ltd issue contractual invoices. Under contra proferentem/CRA transparency, ambiguity is read against the drafter.
The invoice heading (“Motoring Offences Invoice” / “motoring offences/fines – issued by Bank Parking Management Ltd”) is inaccurate and arguably misleading. A private parking charge is not a motoring offence and not a fine. That misdescription strengthens a fairness/clarity challenge, even if the £10 is modest.
What this means for your prospects to challenge:• Strict contractual position: they can likely rely on “other sums or liabilities” and “each referral”. On a black-letter reading, £10 for processing is not obviously unlawful.
• Fairness/ambiguity position: you have a credible argument that the clause and their invoice wording mislead consumers into thinking only fines/offences are covered; a private PCN is neither. That supports a complaint and a goodwill refund, and it’s the better hill to stand on if you choose to push.
• Practicality: £10 is recoverable, but litigating purely against the hire firm on clause construction is not cost-effective. Use complaint leverage first.
These are the routes I would advise you consider:A) Ask the hire/lease company for a goodwill refund
– Grounds: (i) PCN cancelled; (ii) misdescription (“motoring offences/fines”) when the item was a private invoice; (iii) ambiguity around “parking fines” versus private PCNs; (iv) fairness/transparency under the Consumer Rights Act 2015.
– Outcome sought: refund the £10 and correct their billing descriptors so consumers are not misled.
– Escalation: if they are BVRLA members, threaten (and if needed, use) BVRLA conciliation.
B) Ask Bank Parking Management Ltd to reimburse the £10
– Grounds: their erroneous PCN (despite pre-payment) caused foreseeable loss (the admin fee). Keep it to actual, provable loss; courts don’t compensate “time/inconvenience” in small claims unless you run a separate data-protection distress claim.
– If they refuse, a small claim for the £10 plus court fee is straightforward and low risk.
C) Consider a narrow data-protection angle (optional)
– Only if, on disclosure, it appears Bank requested/used DVLA data or processed personal data without first checking their payment/whitelist records. If so, you could claim modest damages (often £50–£200) for distress plus the £10 as loss. To assess, send a SAR to Bank for ANPR hits, payment/VRM match logs, DVLA request/response timestamps, and the internal cancellation reason.
Here are two short templates you can use
1. Hire/lease company (goodwill refund request)QuoteRe: Admin fee for “Motoring Offences Invoice” – Bank Parking Management Ltd
Dear Sirs,
I dispute the £10 admin charge applied for a “motoring offences/fines” referral. The underlying notice was a private parking charge from Bank Parking Management Ltd, not a motoring offence or fine, and it has now been cancelled.
Your invoice description is inaccurate and risks misleading consumers. Clause 9n refers to “fines (including speeding, parking and congestion charge fines)” and this creates ambiguity when contrasted with private parking invoices. Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, terms and charges must be transparent and fair, and ambiguity is construed against the drafter.
As the notice was cancelled and no liability existed, please refund the £10 within 14 days and confirm you will amend your descriptors to avoid suggesting private invoices are “offences” or “fines”. If you decline, please confirm whether you are a BVRLA member so I may refer the matter to conciliation.
Yours faithfully,
[Your name]
2. Bank Parking Management Ltd (reimbursement of admin fee)QuoteRe: Cancelled PCN Ref: [PCN reference number] – request for reimbursement of consequential loss
Dear Sirs,
You issued a PCN despite pre-paid parking. You have since cancelled the notice.
Your error caused a foreseeable loss: the vehicle hire company charged a £10 administration fee to process your enquiry. Please reimburse £10 within 14 days.
If payment is not received, I will consider a small claim for the fee, court costs and statutory interest under s.69 County Courts Act 1984.
Separately, please treat this as a request for the internal reason for cancellation.
Yours faithfully,
[your name]
Optional: SAR text to Bank (if you wish to explore a data-protection head)QuotePlease supply, for PCN [ref], (i) all ANPR event data; (ii) payment/VRM match logs and whitelist hits; (iii) the internal case notes/audit trail; (iv) the DVLA request and response with timestamps; and (v) the recorded cancellation reason.
My suggestion... start with A (hire company goodwill refund) and B (seek £10 from Bank). If either pays, you stop. If both refuse and you want the point of principle, issue a claim against Bank for the £10; it is simple, proportionate, and they may settle.
Only add the data-protection claim after you’ve reviewed the SAR material that shows they went to DVLA before checking their own payment records. -
-
Many thanks everyone, lots of good solid advice here and some very useful learning from my perspective.
I’ll need to talk through the various options with my friend and see where they want to go.
As always I am very grateful to everyone who has given their time to contribute. -
-
An update.
Given that Bank had issued a letter to cancel the PCN, I struggled to convince my friend to invest any further time in this, especially as the admin charge was only £10.
However, Bank have now excelled themselves by issuing a follow up letter, now demanding £170 for the PCN they have cancelled.
So, I’ve done a SAR to Bank to see what they hold and we will reassess once we’ve seen their response and whether it prompts them to cancel it again, only properly this time. -
Funny x 1
View List