PCN issued on a private, unadopted road

Redx

live link https://imgur.com/QCDPf41

fisherjim

If it's unadopted it really just means the local authority doesn't maintain it, and as the part you parked on is allegedly private the land owner(s) can engage a PPC to "manage" it, and try to scam money out of people that park where they don't want them to.


Signage has to conform to the IPC COP, though they won't bother if it does or doesn't.


This is probably a self ticketing operation unless it's a new build estate.


Either way it's not a fine it's an invoice given out like confetti by scammers.

jackRlnd

>This is probably a self ticketing operation unless it's a new build estate

I believe this to be the case.

Could anyone clarify whether this is true or not. I read somewhere that for ANPR tickets:

2. The car park was on “relevant land”. Relevant land is defined as private land and specifically excludes the following land:
(a) a public highway
(b) a parking place which is provided or controlled by a traffic authority
(c ) any other land where parking of a vehicle is subject to statutory control (such as airports and railway stations which are covered by byelaws).

I've also read in places that private roads can be public highways under certain circumstances, the fact that traffic flows freely through this road in both directions makes me think this is one of those circumstances.

fisherjim

jackRlnd wrote: »

>This is probably a self ticketing operation unless it's a new build estate

I believe this to be the case.

Could anyone clarify whether this is true or not. I read somewhere that for ANPR tickets:

2. The car park was on “relevant land”. Relevant land is defined as private land and specifically excludes the following land:
(a) a public highway
(b) a parking place which is provided or controlled by a traffic authority
(c ) any other land where parking of a vehicle is subject to statutory control (such as airports and railway stations which are covered by byelaws).

I've also read in places that private roads can be public highways under certain circumstances, the fact that traffic flows freely through this road in both directions makes me think this is one of those circumstances.

I believe the answers are all yes, but what has this to do with anpr?

Coupon-mad

The Council will say this is not a case of spaces provided to the general public to park under the Road Traffic Act 1988, but are spaces provided pursuant to section 12(1)c of the Housing Act 1985 in:

'providing and maintaining in connection with housing accommodation...other buildings or land which, in the opinion of the Secretary of State, will serve a beneficial purpose in connection with the requirements of the persons for whom the housing accommodation is provided'.

Thanks to IamEmanresu for that info, which another Council provided to him.

That is how come Wing can issue PCNs in housing areas too. Always arguable that the POFA doesn't apply though, since it is a fact that the land is Council owned.

jackRlnd

I believe the answers are all yes, but what has this to do with anpr?

somewhere in Schedule 4 paragraphs 8 and 9 of the PoFA, it states that the car must be parked on relevant land where relavant land excludes public highways amongst other things.

if the private road is indeed a public highway, then am I not correct in saying that keeper liability does not apply hence making this and any PCN issued on this stretch of road invalid?

jackRlnd

The Council will say this is not a case of spaces provided to the general public to park under the Road Traffic Act 1988, but are spaces provided pursuant to section 12(1)c of the Housing Act 1985 in:

thanks for this. so whilst that section of road is not supposed to be a car park (no painted parking bays etc and the housing development has car bays inside the gates) it could still be argued that as that space is beneficial to those residents, it is not for the general public despite being only just wide enough to allow a single vehicle through when a car is parked on the side.

I've read the newbie thread and i know i should just be ignoring all the threatening letters after I've sent off the appeal but I'm in half a mind to just pay the invoice and not have to think about this again

Coupon-mad

Don't. People who pay, sponsor the scam and fund the next 3 or 4 PCNs.

It's because people pay these that these firms still exist, and chose you this time.

fisherjim

jackRlnd wrote: »

somewhere in Schedule 4 paragraphs 8 and 9 of the PoFA, it states that the car must be parked on relevant land where relavant land excludes public highways amongst other things.

if the private road is indeed a public highway, then am I not correct in saying that keeper liability does not apply hence making this and any PCN issued on this stretch of road invalid?

I believe you are wrong, and are over thinking this.


I still don't understand why you are concerned with anpr, when you think it is self ticketing

KeithP

jackRlnd wrote: »

somewhere in Schedule 4 paragraphs 8 and 9 of the PoFA, it states that the car must be parked on relevant land where relavant land excludes public highways amongst other things.

Yes, and if car is not parked on relevant land, then liability cannot be transferred to the keeper.

jackRlnd wrote: »

if the private road is indeed a public highway, then am I not correct in saying that keeper liability does not apply hence making this and any PCN issued on this stretch of road invalid?

But that does not make "this and any PCN issued on this stretch of road invalid".


Other things may make "this and any PCN issued on this stretch of road invalid", but it is certainly not Schedule 4 paragraphs 8 and 9 of the PoFA.