Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hello everyone,

I received a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) from Euro Car Parks, and I would appreciate some advice on how to proceed.

Situation:

The driver entered the Co-op Georgetown Fuel Station car park in Didcot on 20th July 2024 at 10:57:50 and left at 12:04:24, which resulted in an overstay of the maximum allowed parking time. The driver went to a post office in the CO-OP and has a receipt of payment.
The notice was issued to the registered keeper, on 25th July 2024, stating that the vehicle had overstayed the time limit. The registered keeper became aware of the PCN on 1st Sept 2024. The post was opened late, no other reason.

Notice Details:

Date of Event: 20/07/2024
Date Issued: 25/07/2024
Contravention: Overstay
Google Maps location: https://maps.app.goo.gl/QJr1ogFBWiN5M9td8

I have uploaded images of the PCN for reference (personal details have been redacted). Apologies, inserting imgur links didn't work for me, hence pasting links below.

https://imgur.com/a/lOmAY5I
https://imgur.com/a/NlslFJU
https://imgur.com/a/uFShZ2A

Request:

Could you please advise on the steps to take from here?

Many Thanks in advance!

Thanks for responding.
I think there is one sign but it is nearby so I will go tomorrow and take pictures.
There is a co-op shop and a post office in a corner inside.

As with all ECP PCNs, their signs do not fully comply with the BPA CoP and also fail PoFA requirements to "adequately" bring to the attention of the driver, the charge for breaching the terms of parking.

For example, compare the sign you have show us to the one in the Beavis case that they love to harp on about so much:



Also, have a read of what the BPA Code of Practice (CoP) section 19.4 says about signs, especially id they intend to rely on PoFA to hold the keeper liable:

https://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/AOS/NEW%20Redesigned%20Documents/Version91.2.2024Highlight.pdf

Does the entrance sign to the location conform to Appendix B?

Also, whilst the new Joint CoP does not apply yet to locations where there I existing signage, it can be noted the intention to require signs to fully conform with their requirements is necessary:

https://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/AOS/NEW%20Redesigned%20Documents/sectorsingleCodeofPractice.pdf

Section 3.1.3(j) is worth having a read of.

So, look through the CoP and point out their breaches of the CoP. List them. You need to understand why the PCN has not been issued correctly.

As with all ECP PCNs, their signs do not fully comply with the BPA CoP and also fail PoFA requirements to "adequately" bring to the attention of the driver, the charge for breaching the terms of parking.

For example, compare the sign you have show us to the one in the Beavis case that they love to harp on about so much:



Also, have a read of what the BPA Code of Practice (CoP) section 19.4 says about signs, especially id they intend to rely on PoFA to hold the keeper liable:

https://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/AOS/NEW%20Redesigned%20Documents/Version91.2.2024Highlight.pdf

Does the entrance sign to the location conform to Appendix B?

Also, whilst the new Joint CoP does not apply yet to locations where there I existing signage, it can be noted the intention to require signs to fully conform with their requirements is necessary:

https://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/AOS/NEW%20Redesigned%20Documents/sectorsingleCodeofPractice.pdf

Section 3.1.3(j) is worth having a read of.

Hi, thanks for your very useful comments. Actually there is an entrance sign, I need to check the font requirements according to the guidance you've pointed. But if that complies, can I challenge it solely on the basis of something that you've pointed out where the background of the fine amount is not different and doesn't make it stand out to a person parking there? or is there any other argument that anyone sees? I need to respond this week as another letter was received few weeks ago and my unfortunate busy schedule is not helping my situation either.

Many thanks for your guidance!

Debt collectors are nothing to worry about, and their letters can be ignored. Wait for a Letter of Claim from Euro Car Park's solicitors.

Never, ever, ever, ever, ever and I can't stress enough... EVER communicate with a debt collector. We don't need to see the useless garbage they send out. You can safely ignore all debt collector letters. Use them to line the bottom of a cat litter tray if really feel the urge to keep them.

To reassure you, this is what is going to happen... You will receive more DRA letters which you continue to ignore. At some point, you will receive a Letter of Claim (LoC) from DCB Legal. When you do, let us know and we will give you a response to it.

Next you will receive a response to your response to the LoC. Then, at least a month after the original LoC, you will receive an actual N1SDT Claim from from the CNBC. Again, let us know when that happens and show us the issue date of the form and the Particulars of Claim (PoC).

We will provide advice on how to acknowledge service of the claim and then provide a short defence and accompanying Draft Order and how to submit it. DCB Legal will respond some time after acknowledging the defence and that they intend to proceed. All expected and normal.

The next thing you receive is a Directions Questionnaire (DQ) which is easily completed and sent back to the CNBC and copied to DCB Legal. A while later, you will receive notice from the CNBC that the case has been transferred to YOUR local court and it will either contain a hearing date or if not, another letter from your local court will be sent and will contain a hearing date and a deadline for both parties to submit their "bundles", which in your case, would be your Witness Statement.

At some point before the hearing, the Claimant is required to pay the hearing fee. At this point DCB Legal will discontinue and that will be the end of the matter. We have evidence of this modus operandi for well over 400 cases in the last two years on this and the MSE forum alone.

They are hoping you are low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree and will capitulate and pay up when you see the terms 'bailiff" or "CCJ" bandied about and if that didn't work, they hope that the initiation of litigation with a claim will do the job. They do not want this to go to a hearing and as soon as the time comes to pay the hearing fee, they discontinue and go off in search of riper fruit on the gullible tree to try and scam.

I am happy to put odds of 100:1 that this will be the scenario. Even if I were wrong, and I have not yet been so, and you were so unlucky and were to lose a claim, there is no danger whatsoever of a CCJ.

That's good news. Plan A strikes again.

FYI, what you were issued was not and never can be a "fine", so please stop referring to these Parking Charge Notices (PCN) as such. If you can find the word "fine" anywhere in any of the correspondence I will pay you £100.
A PCN is simply an invoice for a debt owed because of an alleged breach of contract by the driver. They are easily dealt with, as you have seen in your case.

Do not ever expect CCTV to be of any evidential value in a civil case. It is only useful in criminal cases where forensic evidence is required.