Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Bank the cheque.  No doubt it will bounce - but you never know. When it bounces - that is when you are meant to access their website link and enter your personal details - but of course - DON'T.
    • Wayne Ting, chief executive of e-scooter firm Lime, says there's room for improvement. View the full article
    • If you are absolutely certain* that you were parked OK, write a letter of complaint to the Headteacher and copy in the Chair of the school governors.   If you or the car were identifiable in any way from the photo (eg visible registration number, driver's face etc) I would very politely write that you resent the untrue suggestion that you had parked/had stopped/were waiting in a way that contravened any traffic regulations, and that you are sure that the school will understand that you would like an apology and a correction to be printed in the next newsletter.  (You can also clearly state that you were identifiable from the photo because other parents have mentioned it to you).   See if that works.   You don't want to go to court for defamation as you'll need access to about £10k in fees before you get out of bed.  You just want an apology and a correction.  If what you've told us is accurate, I don't see any reasonable school failing to say sorry.     *My wife is a former school governor and my experience listening to her is that very very few parents actually understand the meaning of the no stopping/no waiting signs and road markings outside schools.  Don't complain unless you are sure you weren't stopped where you shouldn't have been.
    • And they haven't offered a speed awareness course either?  (Have you done one in the last three years or is this in Scotland?)   And is one of the notices for 34 in a 30?  As Man in the Middle says, that ought to be below the level at which they take action.   (And sorry - I don't want to appear preachy - but...  there don't have to be any warnings or signs or lines on the road to advise you of the presence of speed cameras.  If you get away with an exceptional hardship argument you will need to stick to speed limits in future - whether you know there are cameras there or not.  NB Don't know if this applies to you, but most 30 mph limits are restricted roads with a system of streetlighting and don't even need speed limit signs - you are assumed to know this from the Highway Code).
    • It's up to you if you want to pay £300 you don't owe plus whatever Unicorn Food Tax with no basis in law whatsoever that they will have made up in the Letter Before Claim.   We'd prefer you didn't.   But you have received a LBC so it's make your mind up time.   So please    - post up photos of the signage in the dark that you'll have taken two months ago (post 14)    - post up details of planning permission for their signs you'll have found out after you got onto the council, again two months ago (again post 14)    - also let us know if you agree with Brassnecked's excellent letter or if you'd like to tweak bits depending on what you've found out    - upload the LBC.  Some of them are appallingly drafted and invariably contain Unicorn Food Tax which is all useful extra ammo    - also, where are you living now (post 35) and are you comfortable with legal communications arriving at your parents'?   If you look in our PPC Successes thread at the top of the page, you will see 275 times these cheats have been seen off with their tails between their legs (and all had the same "well known legal companies" (ho! ho!) on hand).  In reality 275 times is a massive underestimate, in all 275 cases there was a "moment of victory" IYSWIM where the PPC were thrashed in court or discontinued a claim or were called off by a supermarket chain, etc., etc.  There will have been at least that number again where they were told to Foxtrot Oscar and then crawled back under their stone.  They are eminently beatable but logically when you're in legal dispute you have to put some graft in to beat the other party.
  • Our picks

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1681 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

I've been parking on a retail car park for months now to enable me to go to work,

but suddenly this week I've received to PCN's for 2 consecutive days on the 6/7th April

asking me to pay £100 for each.


Lots of people have said to ignore the charges and I've looked on different forums

who also say ignore it but reading on the CAG forums other people are saying to challenge it.

Not sure what to do.



Feeling very confused and stressed about the whole thing, as never had any parking charges before.


Have driven back to the car park to check for signs

and there is a small sign saying customer parking only on the way in

but no other signs near the parking bays.



As I’ve been using the parking for a few months now didn't realise that I would be hit with fines,

until these sudden PCN's came through the letter box.



When you drive out there’s a sign to say that if you over stay your 180minutes free parking that you will be fined £100,

but this is not made clear when entering the car park.



Tbh I've never taken any notice as the car park has always been for free...

.. as other colleagues have been using the car park as well.


Don't want to pay 2x £100 as i do not believe it was made clear that they had brought in parking charges.

.. and also believe that £100 is ridiculous.


Please can anyone offer me some advice to my best course of action?


Stressed driver!

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok firstly

please fill this out:





they are not 'fines'

they are speculative invoices



and I hope the signs dont use the word 'fine'

as you have indicated?

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK photograph the signs as they must say more than customer parking only.



If that is what the sign at the entrance says and other signs have the bit about 3 hrs parking etc then a piccy of those and an idea of where they are placed will be very useful.


What was the exact date you got the demand through the post

and does it include any photographic evidence or mention the keeper liability under the PoFA?



Post up the NTK if you can.



If not tell us exactly what they say, do not paraphrase or offer your interpretation as the wording is crucial

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are the pictures of the car park and signs..


I received both letters through the post on the 18 April

and it has pictures of my car entering and leaving the car park and the amount of time I spent there.


The letter says word for word....


On 07 April 2016 you were the registered keeper of vehicle registration:

******** make: ********* colour: ****** which was parked on private property at:

century retail park, Hanley, Stoke-On-Trent, ST1 5QQ.


By entering and parking the vehicle on our client's private property the driver agreed,

with G24 Limited ('the creditor') to be bound by the terms and conditions of parking shown below.



The terms and conditions were clearly displayed at the entrance to, and in prominent places within, the car park.



In accordance with the agreement, by leaving your vehicle in the car park in breach of the terms and conditions of parking,

the driver is hereby required to pay a parking charge the sum of £100.00

within 28 days of the date of this contractual parking charge notice.


Term breached: Exceeding the maximum duration of stay permitted at century retail park, Hanley, Stoke-On-Trent, ST1 5QQ.


Term applicable: That a sum (''the parking charge'') of £100.00 is payable.


To date, the contractually agreed parking charge had not been paid in full

and we do not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver.



If the parking charge is paid within 14 days of the date of this contractual parking notice, it will be reduced to £60.00.



If no payment is recieved within 28 days G24 Ltd will forward the outstanding debt to a debt recovery agency,

and the driver may incur additional costs for late payment.


Your are not invited to


a) Pay the unpaid parking charge or;


b) If you were not the driver of the vehicle, to notify us of the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and pass this notice on to the driver.


Please be warned; that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given

(i) the amount of the unpaid parking charge specified in this notice has not been paid in full and

(ii) we do not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver

, we have the right to recovery the unpaid parking charge from you, the registered keeper.


Please see the reverse of this notice for further information on how to pay / how to make a representation against the parking charge.


Spelling mistakes include with letter.


Went around the car park to take pictures and as you can see there is not a clear sign with the terms and conditions at the entrance…

. Plus all terms and conditions signs are all facing the perimeter of the car park

….and more specifically there are none in the area where I parked (outside burger king)

which is why I photographed that area.






Link to post
Share on other sites

the 'creditor' what utter bowlarks

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the NTK contain everything needed to comply with schedule 4 of the POFA 2012??


Check here;



There can be no keeper liability if not, let alone the inadequate signage...

Link to post
Share on other sites

the signs are not a contract but an "invitation to treat"

so you are then allowed to decide if you want to enter into a contract that is subsequently offered.


"O" level law case study this one,

you go into a shop that has a big sign outside saying 50% off most items

and you go in, select an item not in the sale and ask how much.



the shopkeeper says it is full price and you then cannot

1) force the shopkeeper to sell you it at 50% off,

2) force the shopkeeper to sell it to you at all as the contract is offer

and consideration so you offer the money and he accepts the money

and gives you the goods in return.



Likewise the shopkeeper

1) cannot force you to buy something just for enquiring about his sale and

2) cannot charge you for wasting his time.


The invitation is that sign,

that doesnt say you cannot park without agreeing to the contract offered by another sign somewhere else

so you can park and it is up to you whether you want to consider and accept the rest of what is in the sale.


G24, Excel and others commonly make this error and they have lost at court

because of it so dont be bullied into paying them anything or believing their bs.

they know it is wrong but do nothing

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...