PCN issued on a private, unadopted road

jackRlnd

Hi,

I recently received a PCN. Looking back there were clear signs on the nearby walls

I did some research on the road and according to the council road register, that part of the road is private.

I also believe that part of the road seems to be unadopted as road markings stop further back and there are numerous pot holes etc indicating the council does not maintain that section.

My question is does a private firm like CPM have the authority to issue PCN's on this part of the road if access to regular traffic and pedestrians is not restricted and as such falls under the council's jurisdiction.

I ask this only because I came across House of Commons Briefing Paper CBP 402, it states that for legal purposes there are three main sorts of private or unadopted road:

• Private roads which are highways for one or more classes of traffic, and so “roads” for the purposes of the Road Traffic Act 1988 and some other legislation which uses the same definition.
• Private roads to which the public have access and so also “roads” for the purposes of such legislation, but not (or not yet) highways.
• Private roads which are not highways, nor subject to public access

I have no problem paying the fine but I would like clarification on whether CPM are legally allowed to issue the fine (on behalf of the land owners) on such a private, unadopted road that does not restrict traffic or pedestrians from going through

nosferatu1001

It doesnt fall under the councils jurisdiction
However if it is just a roadway, and NOT a car park, and the public have access to t then the RT enactments DO apply and so it is NOT relevant land for th epurpose of POFA, meaning no keeper liability.

it is NOT A FINE. Dont EVER call it that. Its merely an invoice.

The_Deep

Indeed, it is an invoices for damages. Damages which you have inflicted on the landowner by allegedly breaching an alleged contract. Do not pay anyone anything unless a judge orders you to, it it is scam.

It is the will of Parliament that these scammers, (very often former clampers), be put out of business.

Hopefully that will take place in the near future. The Bill has passed through the HOC without hitch, and goes to the Lords soon. In the meantime involve your MP, the poor dears are buckling under the weight of complaints about these scammers.

This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of alleged contracts for alleged parking offences, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors. Is has been suggested by an MP that some of these companies may have connections to organised crime.

Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, (especially Smart}, and others have already been named and shamed in the House of Commons as have Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each week), hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned. They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

The problem has become so widespread that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers.

Sir Greg Knight's Private Members Bill to curb the excesses, and perhaps close down, some of these companies passed its Third Reading in late November, and, with a fair wind, will become Law next year.

All three readings are available to watch on the internet, (some 6-7 hours), and published in Hansard. MPs have an extremely low opinion of the industry. Many are complaining that they are becoming overwhelmed by complaints from members of the public. Add to their burden, complain in the most robust terms about the scammers.
i

Fruitcake

As already mentioned, it is not a fine.

I am surprised that you have no problem with paying an unregulated scammer any amount of money. I certainly do.

I suggest you follow the advice you will find in the sticky thread for NEWBIES, then send the appeal template you will find there in post 1.

I also urge you to complain to your MP about this scam as well as advised by TD.

jackRlnd

However if it is just a roadway, and NOT a car park, and the public have access to t then the RT enactments DO apply and so it is NOT relevant land for th epurpose of POFA, meaning no keeper liability

if there is no keeper liability, if I refuse to provide the name of the driver do they still have the right to recover the amount from me the keeper if it remains unpaid?

Coupon-mad

according to the council road register, that part of the road is private.

Then IMHO, it is relevant land, and UKCPM can hold a keeper liable but only if they complied with the POFA and had very prominent, legible (and lit if it was dark) signs with clear contractual terms.

Don't go and PAY the likes of ex-clampers UKCPM, please. Just don't go there.

Redx

not unless they can get a judge on their side, in civil court, within 6 years

so the keeper is not liable and should prevail in court if they failed POFA2012 or if POFA has no relevance

jackRlnd

I am surprised that you have no problem with paying an unregulated scammer any amount of money. I certainly do.

I guess I'm looking at it more from the perspective of the landowner. Does the landowner get anything out of any invoices ?

Coupon-mad

Probably not. Sometimes a tenner a ticket, but mostly, no.

DoaM

What's the flow of this road?

Adopted Road >> Unadopted Road through an estate >> Adopted Road ??

Adopted Road >> Unadopted Road into an estate with no other exit ??

RT Act would apply to the former but not the latter.

jackRlnd

What's the flow of this road?

The road has exits on both sides to B roads. The road is not fully private, part of it is public and maintained by the council.

The road in question is highlighted in blue with a red cross where the vehicle was parked

imgur . com/QCDPf41

I understand I am not allowed to post urls as a new user. I hope I am not breaching site rules by adding some spaces. I can edit and remove the link if so