Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hi all.

I've received a parking charge from CPM. Alleged offence is on the 1st December, ticket was sent on the 3rd, and it was received yesterday. It is my car in the images, and the vehicle was parked for about 3 minutes at the location they say it was.

The location is Haydon Way, London. Although its an older Google streetview link, the signage at the beginning of the street is exactly the same and was checked yesterday. There is now a single sign, on the pillar to the right of the blue van. My vehicle was stopped on the yellow lines, by the green window on the left hand side, about 50m before the single CPM sign.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/A8dTNYCfKFwD2oV98

The letter states that my vehicle was parked on private land, and that the signage is clearly displayed through the area. They also claim that the signage confirms that the land is managed by UK CPM.

My issue is that they're claiming this is private land. However, there is absolutely no signage to confirm this, until you've driven 75m into the road.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/Xvn7ZmLjBkRCbyew7

If you drive in and stop immediately, you won't ever see this signage. Beyond the image of the single sign they've posted are a few new build residential blocks, which aren't shown in the most of streetview images. I don't doubt that they manage the land beyond this, but this street was here long before the new builds were and I think they're probably chancing it and issuing tickets beyond the land they manage, especially when there is a Drs surgery on the left hand side, and what I believe is a care home on the right hand side as you enter Haydons Way. It appears to be a public road.

I'm assuming that an appeal with CPM will be next to useless much akin to a student marking his own homework, but needs to be done anyway. How do I confirm exactly where they are permitted to issue tickets, and what are my next steps? I will attend today and get some clearer images.

I forgot to add, the images they've taken are 10 seconds apart, and the incident time was 2 minutes later

Ticket pics as attached

Do you mean this sign?

OK. So there is no "Entrance Sign". The first sign is a terms & contdidion sign. That evidence is an immediate brach of the the IPC CoP and the PPSCoP. No entrance sign, no contract formed.

You can email the council at with the following:

Subject: Request for highway adoption status – Haydon Way, SW11 (Highways Act 1980 s.36)

Dear Highways/Highway Records Team,

Please confirm the highway status of Haydon Way, London SW11 (location attached/linked and described below).

I require written confirmation of whether Haydon Way is:

• a highway maintainable at public expense (adopted), or
• private/unadopted, or
• partly adopted and partly private.

If it is partly adopted, please specify the precise extent of the adopted highway (with a plan extract or a description using fixed reference points).

This request is made for confirmation from the Council’s “List of Streets maintainable at public expense” (Highways Act 1980, section 36) and any highway extent/boundary records you hold.

Location details:

Haydon Way, SW11

Please see attached map screenshot / What3Words / Google Maps pin: [paste link]

Section of interest: from [start point] to [end point]

Many thanks,
[Name]
[Address]
[Email / phone]

In the meantime, simply follow this advice as any initial appeal is never accepted. There is no legal obligation on the known keeper (the recipient of the Notice to Keeper (NtK)) to reveal the identity of the unknown driver and no inference or assumptions can be made.

The NtK is not compliant with all the requirements of PoFA which means that if the unknown driver is not identified, they cannot transfer liability for the charge from the unknown driver to the known keeper.

Use the following as your appeal. No need to embellish or remove anything from it:

I am the keeper of the vehicle and I dispute your 'parking charge'. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner.

As your Notice to Keeper (NtK) does not fully comply with ALL the requirements of PoFA 2012, you are unable to hold the keeper of the vehicle liable for the charge. Partial or even substantial compliance is not sufficient. There will be no admission as to who was driving and no inference or assumptions can be drawn. CPM has relied on contract law allegations of breach against the driver only.

The registered keeper cannot be presumed or inferred to have been the driver, nor pursued under some twisted interpretation of the law of agency. Your NtK can only hold the driver liable. CPM have no hope should you be so stupid as to try and litigate, so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.

Come back once you receive the rejection and I will give you a suitable IAS appeal, even though there is little chance that that will succeed either, due to the fact that the IAS is a kangaroo court, but you never know. Keep those photos as evidence you can send with your IAS appeal to show no entrance sign.

This would not stand a chance if they are stupid enough to try and litigate and they would most likely receive a spanking in court if they tried.

On the basis that the council come back and say that I was on their bit of the road, and CPM have no authority to act there, I presume that there are also issues with regards to CPM (and by extension the DVLA) misusing my data?

On the basis that the council come back and say that I was on their bit of the road, and CPM have no authority to act there, I presume that there are also issues with regards to CPM (and by extension the DVLA) misusing my data?

It would seem so yes.

Will be interesting to see what the appeal outcome is.
     

Been sent, but acknowledged and no further reply