PCN - received while vehicle was being loaded for 10 minutes.

[KHarHar]

Hello! Thanks for clicking on my post


Today I received a PCN from a company called Parking Control Management. It states that I parked for a duration of 10 minutes on private land which is PERMIT HOLDERS ONLY.






https://postimg.cc/gallery/Sbwf7Jj


The driver was collecting some furniture from a Facebook marketplace seller, and I am surprised that it was even 10 minutes. Now they want at least £60!

I have appealed the notice on the grounds that the vehicle was being loaded with heavy furniture from a resident, and that I was not the driver of the car.

I have also attached a screenshot of a message from the seller telling me that there is a car park which can be used to "load and stuff" alongside their full address.

What are the chances of this winning on appeal, and if not, do I have a leg to stand on to continue to complain and push ahead?

I'm currently fighting with a Real Estate agent who is not giving me a permit for my separate and unrelated parking space at home (where I got ticketed), so this £60 is really hitting me!


Thanks for reading! Any thoughts/help would be much appreciated.

[b789]

@KHarHar, the first thing I need to know is exactly what you said in the initial appeal. You say that you appealed on the basis that "I was not the driver", but I would want to see the precise wording you submitted to make sure the driver was not inadvertently identified elsewhere in the appeal. Please post the appeal exactly as sent.

Also, don't think of this as a £60 ticket. It is a £100 private parking invoice, with a 40% "mugs discount" if you pay quickly. The £60 is simply the discounted amount they offer to encourage early payment before you have properly challenged it.

On the substantive point, genuine short-duration loading of heavy furniture from a resident gives you a credible argument, particularly under Jopson v Homeguard, where the court distinguished temporary loading/unloading from ordinary parking. The seller's message expressly telling you that the car park could be used to "load and stuff" is useful evidence.

I would not expect PCM to willingly accept the appeal, but that does not mean the charge is necessarily enforceable. If they reject it, the exact appeal wording, the signage and the evidence of the loading activity become important.

[KHarHar]

@KHarHar, the first thing I need to know is exactly what you said in the initial appeal. You say that you appealed on the basis that "I was not the driver", but I would want to see the precise wording you submitted to make sure the driver was not inadvertently identified elsewhere in the appeal. Please post the appeal exactly as sent.

Also, don't think of this as a £60 ticket. It is a £100 private parking invoice, with a 40% "mugs discount" if you pay quickly. The £60 is simply the discounted amount they offer to encourage early payment before you have properly challenged it.

On the substantive point, genuine short-duration loading of heavy furniture from a resident gives you a credible argument, particularly under Jopson v Homeguard, where the court distinguished temporary loading/unloading from ordinary parking. The seller's message expressly telling you that the car park could be used to "load and stuff" is useful evidence.

I would not expect PCM to willingly accept the appeal, but that does not mean the charge is necessarily enforceable. If they reject it, the exact appeal wording, the signage and the evidence of the loading activity become important.

Thanks for the response b789! 

My appeal reads as follows:

"Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing to formally appeal the above Parking Charge Notice as the Registered Keeper of the vehicle.

1. Absence of Parking / Active Loading:

The vehicle was not "parked" at the material time. It was briefly stopped for approximately 10 minutes strictly to perform the active loading of heavy furniture from a nearby residential property. Active loading/unloading is distinct from parking under standard contract law. I have attached a message from the resident showing the address, as well as identifying the area as an area where furniture can be loaded.

2. Consideration & Grace Period:

Under the accredited operator Code of Practice, operators must allow a mandatory consideration period upon entry and a grace period. A total duration of 10 minutes while actively transferring heavy goods falls within reasonable consideration and loading parameters.

3. Keeper Liability:

I was not the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged event. As the registered keeper, I am under no statutory obligation to identify the driver. Should you choose to pursue this matter, you must demonstrate strict compliance with all provisions of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 to transfer liability to the keeper.

Given that the vehicle was actively loading within a reasonable consideration frame and no breach of terms occurred, I request that this charge notice be canceled immediately.

Yours faithfully,"



I hope that helps. 

Thanks

[b789]

Yes, that's good enough. However, no initial appeal is ever successful, no matter how well pleaded. When you receive the appeal rejection, show it to me and I will advise further on how to proceed.

This is easily defended using the Jopson v Homeguard precedent.

[KHarHar]

Yes, that's good enough. However, no initial appeal is ever successful, no matter how well pleaded. When you receive the appeal rejection, show it to me and I will advise further on how to proceed.

This is easily defended using the Jopson v Homeguard precedent.

Cannot thank you enough for taking the time. Will do so when it is rejected. 

Thanks!