Author Topic: SNOW  (Read 74 times)

0 Members and 7 Guests are viewing this topic.

SNOW
« on: »
i am the registered keeper of a car which was parked on a (private) free car park on 1/10/26. I received a PCN today for "not parked wholly within bay" from a BPA member.  The pictures show this. The vehicle was consciously parked in this manner. It was in the end bay but one. The recent snow fall had been cleared and left in a pile in the bay adjacent to where the vehicle was parked.. The amount of snow in the adjacent bay left it unusable. The vehicle was parked over the line to allow easy access under the conditions. Access to the adjacent bay remained the same. The driver was not  aware of the conditions and paid no attention to the signs as there were no fees to pay. The car was parked for approximately 25 minutes. The car park was not full ant any time during this 25 minutes.
Do i have ground to contest the charge?

« Last Edit: Yesterday at 02:34:46 pm by cpj1967 »

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook


Re: SNOW
« Reply #1 on: »
There are always ground to contest.

Post up the PCN for examination - only redact personal info and leave all dates viable as this could be out of time for keeper liability.

Re: SNOW
« Reply #2 on: »

Re: SNOW
« Reply #3 on: »
Welcome to FTLA.

To help us provide the best advice, please read the following thread carefully and provide as much of the information it asks for as you are able to: READ THIS FIRST - Private Parking Charges Forum guide

It would be good to see the back of the notice. Also, if you can get them, copies of the photos on the notice captured from their online portal so we can see what they've captured in terms of evidence.

Aside from any technical arguments (2 photos taken 2 seconds apart doesn't provide a period of parking for example), there would seem to be an argument about commercial justification here. Ordinarily, issuing charges to vehicles that 'straddle' 2 parking bays would have a clear commercial justification (if everyone parked like that, the capacity of the car park would be halved). In this case, if snow was blocking one of the 2 bays rendering it unusable, it's less clear what legitimate commercial objective is being furthered by issuing a charge.

Re: SNOW
« Reply #4 on: »