Thanks FTMDave the bays are not marked as such, but they're referred to in seperate 'management rules' which could easily be construed as written approval to use them. Otherwise, why are we parking there and having to follow this daft 1 hour policy with the PPC (OPS)?

lolerz - thanks, there is no mention of the exact location of the car park/bay, only the name of the development (which is the first line of the address). Sounds like it could be bogroll. Signature is the MA's name, no mention of freehold in the signature itself. After some digging, I can also confirm now that the 'client' is the freehold company (NOT management company), so it seems like the MA got that bit right. The specific part of the lease that worries me is what I mentioned in the OP (see below). 'No vehicles shall be parked within the grounds of the Property otherwise than in the garage forming part of the demised premises or in any other part of the Property previously approved in writing by the Landlord for that purpose' lookinforinfo - thanks, what's an ATA Code of Conduct? Also, I'm pretty sure they haven't applied for planning permission, so I'll investigate. Surely, OPS have no authority to apply for planning permission in a private residential zone?

Thanks dx and lookinforinfo. I had a look at the above case, and it does indeed seem promising. Also as promised, I've attached a sanitised version of the contract, lease and deed of variation. Based on the info so far, this PNC seems like it may be unenforceable, given that I've not appealed and will follow the process outlined on this website. HOWEVER, I have a feeling that if I keep parking in the bays, despite ignoring PNCS, then there might be the possibility that I'm breaching the lease. I wonder what you guys might think about that… Lease.pdf Deed of Variation.pdf OPS contract.pdf

Alright, will send over a sanitised contract when I next get on a PC. Cheers for looking.

Understood. Okay then I'll wait on the letter of claim, if they send it. Let's see what they do... Will keep you updated.

Alright I'll do some more investigating to figure it out. Let's say the contract is between the freehold company and PCC, then how screwed am I?

So, it's the company referred to as "the landlord" in my lease. This is the same company that takes my service charge. As mentioned there seems to be two companies that I have a share of, but unsure which one is the freehold company.

Hmm... Both seem to have the same address... Any other way to check?

Thanks lolerz, so I just need to figure out the terminology here. What is the freehold company? The company that takes my service charge is referred to as the landlord (and is the PPC client). But the titles etc seem to be with the other company, which has barely any money in it. Noted on the NTK point.

Alright, an update. MA has responded with the contract. I haven't read the whole thing yet, but it seems to be signed by the management company. This may mean the PNC is invalid right? However, I need to double check that it is the management company and not the dormant freehold company. How would I know which one is which? I can see all the leaseholders have 1 share each in the management company. In the lease it's referred to as the landlord, whereas the other company is the 'association'. Your steer here would be helpful. Lastly, MA is p'd off that I'm challenging him and is refusing to cancel the PCN. He suggests I appeal, haha. I'll keep being a nuisance, but it looks like I'll need to wait for NTK. So any thoughts on a defence? Cheers

Thanks lolerz, the freehold company is indeed dormant. I am unsure how the RTM company works, but that seems to be by design, as all of the residents don't know either. I've also asked for the contract and demanded again that the PCN be cancelled. No response yet, but I might be the first lessee to do this in a while, so they're probably a bit shook! Let you know what they say...

Yes agreed. I don't think it will solve it, but it might give the issue more coverage. I'm not the only one who has complained about this, but I seem to be the only one willing to make a nuisance. So will continue doing so. BTW there doesn't seem to be any board meetings that shareholders are invited to me. As mentioned, there are a host of other issues with the MA and Board, who likely are doing shady dealings. However this parking directly affects our wallets and goes against the spirit of why there might be a PPC here e.g. to stop randoms from parking in our area. So, this parking issue might be the best way to also start addressing the wider problems. I'll keep you all updated especially when I get the RTK notice. But any further thoughts or advice would be appreciated.

This was before my time, but as I mentioned the Directors are likely crooked and sing to the tune of the MA. And yes I know why I was charged and I'm quite annoyed about it. Most residents don't even show their permits, as it is a huge faff. So, this is doubly annoying.

Alright I'll see what I can do. Thanks for the advice mate. Will keep everyone updated

Alright, I'll try to get Directorship done, but I reckon the MA is just going to drag it out, especially if it means getting this PCN cancelled. Can I also request a copy of the contract between the PPC and the Company (or MA)? Seems like it might be a good way to figure out what to write to the MA, if the contract is in their name.