Free Traffic Legal Advice

Evening everyone,

i was sent over here from the legal advice subreddit for some help over a private PCN that i think isn't legal so i wanted better eyes on it.

The car was on the side of Dacorum way (funnily enough mispelled on the charge notice through the post) in Hemel Hempstead without obstructing traffic and with no sign that there needed to be permits or anything.

Other cars had parked there without any kind of resident permits either so the car was parked there over the course of a couple of days whilst visiting family in Hemel. About a week later there were four PCN's all with the same reason stated for the parking charge being "no parking on Access Roads/ Roadways". From trying to google the only thing i can understand is that this means apparently i was parking on the road which clearly i was not. Any help to clear this up/opinions would be greatful.

Ill attach photo's to better clarify the situation.

Im trying to sort out uploading photos so will update asap

https://imgur.com/a/jHF03hy

This is the exact place where the car was parked.

Is the notice you received a PARKING or a PENALTY notice? Is it issued by a council or local authority? Is it issued by a private parking company?

Where are the "signs" they mention in the NtK? "The signage which is clearly displayed throughout the area..." Errr... not from the photos you've shown us, assuming they are contemporaneous.

The contract can only be formed if the signs are prominent and adequately notify the driver of the charge for breaching the contract. Is there any sign when you enter the location that clearly informs the driver that they are entering private land and that parking is controlled by the operator and tells the driver to see the signs for the terms and conditions of parking?

What was the "period of parking" immediately preceding the incident time? Was that period one minute, one hour or even one year? What is the definition of a "period"? "A length of time". As no "length" of time has been defined, no "period" has been defined.

So, for now, there are two clear points to appeal on, but only as the Keeper. Under no circumstances appeal as the driver. They have no idea who the driver is unless the Keeper blabs it to them. They can only hold the Keeper liable if they fully comply with all the requirements of PoFA. As they have not defined the "period of time", the NtK is not fully compliant. Partial or even substantial compliance is not sufficient.

Also, no contract can have been formed if the signage is inadequate. If there is no contract, then there is no debt.

Unfortunately for you, UKCPM are IPC members and nether of them are going to accept any appeal. You can try but if they refuse, you simply have to wait and see if/when they try a count court claim. That is a good thing because the county court is the ultimate dispute resolution service and not something to fear or worry about.

To clarify, the entrance signage should be prominent to a driver entering the car park (parking area) and merely has to inform them it is private land and that 'some T&Cs' apply such that the driver would then be expected to make some effort to look for and read the detailed T&C signs.  Those T&C signs must still be 'there to be seen' so that a driver, having exited the parked car (or without exiting for 'disabled' spaces) can see there is a sign and then reasonably be bound by it (even if they chose not to read it).

To answer b789 (as DWMB2 put it) the signs are around the corner on the other side of dacorum way and NOWHERE on the stretch I parked or anywhere on that part of the road.

In terms of entrance I can take a pic after work to show you guys but there is no indication that the road is private and only after some research through the hertfordshire website did I even discover this. There are definitely not any signs/plaques indicating it on both entrances to the road

It doesn't really matter as any appeal to POPLA will be primarily based on lack of signage and therefore no contract could exist.

The driver identity issue is not really relevant to this case.