Are you sure? The key issue here is whether the parking operator still has valid authority to operate and issue Parking Charge Notices (PCNs) at the May & Baker Club car park following the dissolution of the landowner entity (May & Baker).
Core Legal Principles:1. Authority to Operate Must Come from the Landowner or Authorised AgentUnder the Private Parking Code of Practice and relevant case law (e.g.
ParkingEye v Beavis), a parking operator must demonstrate they have sufficient legal authority (usually in the form of a contract) from the landowner or a party with legal interest in the land.
2. Dissolution of the LandownerIf May & Baker were the legal owner of the land and they are now dissolved, then:
• Any contract they entered into with the parking operator may be void, expired, or unenforceable.
• Authority cannot be continued unless it has been explicitly transferred to another entity with control or ownership of the land.
3. Residual or Successor InterestsThere are several possible outcomes:
• If the land has been sold or transferred, the new owner would need to grant fresh authority to the parking operator.
• If no such transfer has occurred and the land is now held by the Crown (bona vacantia), then no party has authority to authorise the operator unless explicitly licensed by the Crown (via the Treasury Solicitor).
4. Implications for the PCNIf the operator cannot prove current authority to manage the site, issue tickets, and pursue them, any PCN issued is likely unenforceable. This would constitute a lack of standing.
What to Do:
No appeal has a chance of success. This would've to be fought in court. However, in order to mark your territory you should at least appeal the PCN on the basis that the operator lacks authority:
• Request a copy of the contract or agreement authorising them to issue PCNs at the site.
• Ask for confirmation of the current landowner or controlling party.
• Note that if May & Baker were the principal and are now dissolved, authority must derive from someone else—if not, the operator is acting ultra vires (beyond their powers).
This is best challenged once litigation is initiated by citing lack of landowner authority and requesting strict proof of standing.
