Azure Parking - how to appeal "No parking at any time" PCN?

ChirpyChicken

good news  

fisherjim

Great news but I would question the so called assessors view that a PCN can be issued by a third party for trespass, I think that was pulled out of thin air

Coupon-mad

Ulrich said:

Hi All,

My appeal was allowed today.
Thanks everyone who helped me in any way.

Here's POPLA's assessment and decision:

Decision: Successful

Assessor Name: Rachel Hankinson

Assessor summary of operator case: The parking operator has issued a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) for no parking at any time.

Assessor summary of your case

The appellant has raised the following grounds, which have been summarised: • The PCN has not been issued correctly due to the reason ‘’no parking at any time’’ as the areas is a small lay-by off a public road • They feel that as the area does not permit parking at any time, there are no parking facilities and no contract or agreement can be entered into as it fails the contractual basic test with no offer, no consideration resulting in no contract • The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA) 2012 as the PCN does not specify the period of parking as required or state that the creditor does not know the name of the driver and current address • The PCN doesn’t invite the keeper to pay the charge. Therefore, it fails to comply with PoFA • The operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact liable for the charge and there has been no admittance as to who was driving by the appellant • There is no evidence of landowner authority After reviewing the parking operator’s evidence pack, the appellant reiterates their grounds of appeal in further detail regarding PoFA 2012. The appellant has provided a third party court case transcript as evidence towards their appeal. The above evidence will be considered in making my decision.

Assessor supporting rational for decision

I am allowing this appeal and will detail my reasoning below: By issuing a parking charge notice to the appellant the operator has implied that a breach of the terms and conditions has occurred. When an appeal comes to POPLA, the burden of proof begins with a parking operator to demonstrate that the appellant has breached the restrictions of the car park as they claim. Within their grounds of appeal, the appellant states that as the area does not permit parking at any time, there are no parking facilities and no contract or agreement can be entered into as it fails the contractual basic test with no offer, no consideration resulting in no contract. The signage on site states that no parking at any time is permitted and failure to comply would result in a £100 PCN. It must be recognised that the area in question does not permit motorists to park within the managed area as there are no parking facilities such as bays offered within the privately manged land. The operator would be permitted to issue a PCN for trespass. However, this is not the case. As the PCN does not explicitly mention trespass and the driver would not have to form a contract to trespass on the private land, I cannot be satisfied that the PCN was issued correctly. The appellant has raised other grounds in their appeal, but as I am allowing the appeal, it is not necessary for me to address these.

It's an odd decision but the right one!

Nicely done.

Could you show us a close up of the offending sign, as a screenshot from the evidence pack? Might help future cases.

And please post this in POPLA DECISIONS at the top of the forum.

  

Ulrich

fisherjim said:

Great news but I would question the so called assessors view that a PCN can be issued by a third party for trespass, I think that was pulled out of thin air

maybe because the assessor couldn't just say nothing and allow it?

@Coupon-mad
just curious what exactly is odd in their decision?
the sign in question is this

I've just posted the decision in the appropriate topic.

One more thing:
I mentioned here that ZZPS had increased their demand from £100 (+£1.95 handling fee) to £170 even though I submitted my appeal to POPLA.
Then in February or March they rolled that back to £100.
On 22 Apr POPLA allowed my appeal.

Recently I received a letter from ZZPS by post dated 30 Apr 2025 which reads  "Action required: outstanding balance" and they state they've been assigned a task of recovering the unpaid parking charge due to Azure Parking LTD.
They want £100 + £70 admin fee.
As of today, on their website it shows appeal status: sent on 12/11/2024 and current charge: £170 +£1.95 handling fee.

Should I just ignore the clowns or there is a better way?

Thorndorise

fisherjim said:

Great news but I would question the so called assessors view that a PCN can be issued by a third party for trespass, I think that was pulled out of thin air

Agree, feel's like they are also swimming outside their lane as their remit is surely not to identify opportunities for the PPC to try and charge someone!

kryten3000

Ulrich said:

Should I just ignore the clowns or there is a better way?

They're supposed to suspend debt collection activity during a POPLA appeal, so a complaint to the BPA is probably in order, not that it will make any difference.