+- Private Parking Ticket Legal Advice (PPTLA) (https://pptla.uk)
+-- Forum: Legal advice forum (https://pptla.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Parking Charge Notices forum (https://pptla.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Thread: UKPC PCN while delivering for Amazon Flex – POPLA advice needed (/showthread.php?tid=88)
UKPC PCN while delivering for Amazon Flex – POPLA advice needed - ibadusaf - 05-29-2026
Got a UKPC parking charge while carrying out an Amazon Flex delivery at Moat Lane, Nine Elms Park Embassy Gardens
I appealed directly to UKPC and received the standard rejection stating the vehicle was “parked in an area where no parking is allowed.” I already identified myself as the driver.
Facts:
• Brief stop while carrying out delivery activity
• Vehicle was actively being used for loading/unloading
• Now preparing a POPLA appeal
My current arguments are:
• Active loading/unloading is different from parking
• “No parking” signage may be prohibitive rather than contractual
• UKPC should prove landowner authority
Has anyone successfully challenged UKPC or similar tickets at POPLA in delivery/loading cases? Especially interested in relevant POPLA decisions or wording that worked.
RE: UKPC PCN while delivering for Amazon Flex – POPLA advice needed - b789 - 05-29-2026
Welcome to the forum @ibadusaf. It's a pity you outed yourself as the driver but not to worry. Whilst this will not win at any appeal (initial or POPLA), it will never reach a hearing in court, although a claim will be issued.
As long as you follow the advice you receive here, you won't be paying a penny to UKPC. However, it will be a long drawn out process where you will go through useless debt recovery letters, a county court claim and eventual discontinuation by DCB Legal who are the bulk litigation firm of choice for UKPC.
I can assure you that any county court claim issued by DCB Legal on behalf of UKPC, as long as it is defended, will be discontinued. It's a loss leader for them to issue a county court claim because the vast majority of the low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree will just pay up out of ignorance and fear of the process. The minority of defendants who follow the advice and actually defend the claim are pleasantly surprised when they receive their N279 Notice of Discontinuance.
So, are you prepared to follow the advice?
Please show the Notice to Keeper (NtK) you received and I can assist with your POPLA appeal. POPLA are pretty useless in these cases but as long as you can properly point out legal defects in their case, you have a slight chance of getting decent assessor, not one of the useless morons they mostly employ.
RE: UKPC PCN while delivering for Amazon Flex – POPLA advice needed - ibadusaf - 05-29-2026
Thanks for the response.
Understood regarding identifying myself as the driver — lesson learned there.
I’m prepared to follow the advice and defend it properly if necessary. I’ll upload the NtK shortly.
RE: UKPC PCN while delivering for Amazon Flex – POPLA advice needed - b789 - 05-29-2026
As I mentioned, this will never reach a hearing in court. However, any defence would cite Jopson v Homeguard Services Ltd [2016] B9GF0A9E.
You can also try citing it in your POPLA appeal, but as I mentioned, you are not dealing with an impartial or independent adjudicator and likely to be ignorant of the actual legal implications.
A 17-minute stop is not a “momentary” stop in the everyday sense, so I would avoid presenting it as if it were a 2 or 3-minute delivery. The better argument is that the vehicle was stopped for the duration reasonably required to complete active delivery activity at a large residential/mixed-use development, especially where there were multiple deliveries, controlled access, lifts, concierge/reception points, several blocks, or distance between the vehicle and delivery addresses.
The key Jopson point is paragraph 21: whether the vehicle was “parked” or merely stopped for unloading/delivery is a question of fact and degree. That allows you to say that 17 minutes is not automatically “parking” if the whole period was occupied by delivery activity and the vehicle was not left for the driver’s personal convenience.
I would frame it like this:
Quote:The operator appears to have treated the vehicle as “parked” merely because it was stationary for 17 minutes. That is an error. The issue is not simply whether the vehicle was stationary, but why it was stationary and what the driver was doing during that period.
The vehicle was being used for Amazon Flex delivery activity at a large residential development. The 17-minute duration was reasonably required to complete delivery activity to multiple properties at that location. This included the time needed to locate the relevant block or blocks, access the building, complete delivery to the recipient address or addresses, return to the vehicle and depart. That is not parking in the ordinary contractual sense. It is active loading/unloading and delivery activity.
In Jopson v Homeguard [2016] B9GF0A9E, HHJ Harris QC made clear that there is a real distinction between parking and stopping for delivery, loading or unloading. At paragraph 21, the judge explained that whether a vehicle is parked or merely stopped for loading/unloading is a question of fact and degree. The judgment expressly recognises that delivery activity may require the driver to leave the vehicle while goods are taken to the relevant premises. That reasoning applies here.
UKPC has provided no evidence that the driver was parked for personal convenience, nor that the vehicle was abandoned or left for any purpose unrelated to the delivery. The appellant’s evidence is that the vehicle was stopped only for the period necessary to complete delivery activity. UKPC is put to strict proof that the vehicle was not being used for loading/unloading or delivery activity throughout the material period.
The appellant will provide Amazon Flex evidence showing that delivery activity was being carried out at or around the material time. In a location such as Moat Lane, Nine Elms Park / Embassy Gardens, 17 minutes is entirely consistent with multiple delivery drops within a large development and is not evidence of parking.
I would also add something like this if there is Amazon evidence:
Quote:The appellant invites POPLA to consider the delivery evidence in context. Amazon Flex deliveries are time-stamped and route-based. The appellant was not visiting the site as a shopper, resident, guest or commuter. The sole purpose of the stop was commercial delivery activity. The operator’s photographs do not rebut that. They merely show a stationary vehicle, which is not the same thing as proof of parking in breach of contractual terms.
Evidence to include, if available:
- Amazon Flex itinerary screenshot showing the location and time.
- Number of parcels/drops at Moat Lane / Embassy Gardens.
- Screenshots showing delivery completion times.
- Any Amazon map/route screenshot.
- Any notes showing difficulty accessing the building, concierge, intercom, lifts, or multiple blocks.
- A short witness statement from the driver explaining the sequence of events.
The POPLA appeal should not say “brief stop” too often if the duration is 17 minutes. Say “temporary stop for active delivery/loading activity” instead. That is more accurate and harder for the assessor to dismiss.
RE: UKPC PCN while delivering for Amazon Flex – POPLA advice needed - ibadusaf - 05-30-2026
Just submitted my POPLA appeal for the private parking charge.
Thanks for the advice — really helped me understand how to structure it properly, especially around the delivery activity and evidence side of things.
Now just waiting to see what the outcome is.
RE: UKPC PCN while delivering for Amazon Flex – POPLA advice needed - b789 - 05-30-2026
Don’t pin your hopes on POPLA. If unsuccessful, their decision is not binding on you. You don’t pay.