Group thread: Heathrow Gatwick Manchester & other Airport drop-off PCNs - easy: how to appeal & win

Coupon-mad

And here's a picture of the woeful Gatwick signs, taken by a relative as we dropped off a friend this morning (... hello NCP...). 

  



No we didn't forget to pay once back home but we had to keep reminding each other and it was only because I knew all about it that it remained in my mind and we made a point of paying within half an hour of getting home.

I can totally see why people forget!

Nondescript signs. Unreadable t&cs.

Nothing about added DRA fees.

Why is it justifiable to be a massive £100 reduced to £60? Extortionate for a minor human error.

Why is it the same as stopping on double reds or causing an obstruction? It is absurd enrichment. It USED to be £15 as the early discount.

I think there should be a VERY LARGE sign while you are stopped that is 'in your face' with a continuously scrolling, well-lit and colourful LED message offering a text reminder.

It would take seconds for occupants of a car to send a text (before driving off) to opt into a reminder that pings you 12 then 24 hours later.

Le_Kirk

Nellymoser said:

Petition asking Govt to Ban Drop-off charges at airports

Closes 19th Nov 2025

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/724381

There was another one put forward which was better worded. It was not accepted as this one was already open. Only one petition can run on the same issue on govt website.

Added mine, now at 1,633 - still a long way to go, why aren't more people (everybody) signing this petition?

Nellymoser

It's strange as this petition 
 
Increase regulation of parking signage (council)

has collected 13,026 signatures in a month and is awaiting Govt response as passed the 10,000 mark.

computercat

Happy to confirm that the five-point appeal template at the start of this thread got two PCNs for the "barrier-less" drop-off at Manchester Airport cancelled. ❌🎉 Thanks all!

LoneStarState

Coupon-mad said:

And here's a picture of the woeful Gatwick signs, taken by a relative as we dropped off a friend this morning (... hello NCP...). 

  



No we didn't forget to pay once back home but we had to keep reminding each other and it was only because I knew all about it that it remained in my mind and we made a point of paying within half an hour of getting home.

I can totally see why people forget!

Nondescript signs. Unreadable t&cs.

Nothing about added DRA fees.

Why is it justifiable to be a massive £100 reduced to £60? Extortionate for a minor human error.

Why is it the same as stopping on double reds or causing an obstruction? It is absurd enrichment. It USED to be £15 as the early discount.

Wonder how this all fits in with the new DMCC Act and unfair commercial practice guidance.

Coupon-mad

Wonder how ANY of the DMCC Act affects the current/recent conduct of:

- operators
- DRAs
- the shonky Appeals Services
- the APAs and their shonky 'Joint Code'.

There's a heck of a lot of REALLY interesting silver bullets in the DMCC Act which is clear, even if you skim-read the Technical Note first you get a flavour of it:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/unfair-commercial-practices-cma207

Thanks or the reminder, @LoneStarState.

I don't even think the MHCLG's current proposals and presumptions comply...

We need to trawl though this Act for the Public Consultation and/or we can (LOTS OF US) insist the Government consults the CMA - and the FCA and the ICO - thoroughly.

And everyone (newbies included of course) if you can - and even if you have no spare time, knowledge or inclination to do the Consultation yourself - please please tweet the Public Consultation to the CMA, FCA and ICO and/or tag them in a 'shout out' encouraging responses on whatever Social Media we all use.

We could also tag organisations like the Private Hire / Taxi trade publications, courier organisations, Citizens Advice, StepChange, Money Advice Trust, et al and suggest they join the consumer voice to ban 'debt recovery fees' in this sector completely.

Like with appeals, the parking industry should wholly fund any third party involvement, out of the millions they are rinsing in PCNs. That way (if the DRAs are paid by the industry a going rate regardless of consumer outcome) DRAs won't be in incentivised to ignore matters that arise that make them no money (transfers of liability, permits, blue badges, realisation of keying errors and cases needing reissued PCNs).

All of those outcomes fairly favour consumers but DRAs make no money if they recognise those cases. They currently completely ignore the Appeals Charter section of the Joint Code, saying 'it's too late, pay up and pay more or we'll sue.'

This is why consumers should NOT be the side asked to fund pre-action stage. It is unbalanced: if a DRA does the right thing by a consumer they MAKE NO MONEY.

Thus we can evidence and identify a lack of adequate management of the conflict of interest between giving solutions in the customer’s best interests and recommending an option that makes the firms more money.

If that sounds familiar, it was the exact rationale the FCA used when banning debt packagers from receiving referral fees:

https://www.fca.org.uk/news/press-releases/financial-watchdog-proposes-ban-debt-packager-referral-fees-protect-consumers#

The FCA needs a social media shout...

  

LoneStarState

Coupon-mad said:

Like with appeals, the parking industry should wholly fund any third party involvement, out of the millions they are rinsing in PCNs. That way (if the DRAs are paid by the industry a going rate regardless of consumer outcome) DRAs won't be in incentivised to ignore matters that arise that make them no money (transfers of liability, permits, blue badges, realisation of keying errors and cases needing reissued PCNs).

All of those outcomes fairly favour consumers but DRAs make no money if they recognise those cases. They currently completely ignore the Appeals Charter section of the Joint Code, saying 'it's too late, pay up and pay more or we'll sue.'

This is why consumers should NOT be the side asked to fund pre-action stage. It is unbalanced: if a DRA does the right thing by a consumer they MAKE NO MONEY.

Thus we can evidence and identify a lack of adequate management of the conflict of interest between giving solutions in the customer’s best interests and recommending an option that makes the firms more money.

If that sounds familiar, it was the exact rationale the FCA used when banning debt packagers from receiving referral fees:

https://www.fca.org.uk/news/press-releases/financial-watchdog-proposes-ban-debt-packager-referral-fees-protect-consumers#

The FCA needs a social media shout...

  

Good explanation that ultimately reinforces my belief that these "debt recovery" fees that offer no service/benefit to the consumer who will have likely aready notified the trader they fully dispute the original PCN are essentially a form of drip pricing which of course is banned under the DMCC Act.

saginata

Coupon-mad said:

And here's a picture of the woeful Gatwick signs, taken by a relative as we dropped off a friend this morning (... hello NCP...). 

I've sent in a complaint about these a few days ago. This one shows the bottom of the sign being about 230cm off the ground. The one next to it is at about knee level, so you need to crouch for 40 minutes to get through the terms and conditions (assuming no breaks to stretch your legs and back) before deciding whether or not to use the drop-off. Kind of difficult to have the passenger sit patiently until you're done. The T&C's also don't match the ones on their website. Lighting is kind of bad too, but it's hard to capture on a phone camera. 




This one just tells you to call them if you want the terms and conditions, but when I call, they have no idea what I'm talking about. They also told me there's no way to reject the terms and I will get a fine. When I questioned this they stood their ground and confirmed that yes, they can issue fines. 

Coupon-mad

That's weird (unless that final image is old).

The charge is £7. It's not been £6 for a while.

saginata

Yeah that one is from a few months ago. I've been in a prolonged fight with them.