One Parking Solution - No Marked Bays!

Abu_Sumayyah

Parked in a public car park last weekend and got a windscreen ticket. The PCN says I contravened the displayed T&Cs.

Sign states vehicles must either display a valid OPS Parking Permit in the windscreen, or hold a pre-authorised OPS E-Permit and be fully parked within a marked bay.

Problem: there are no marked bays at all (pics attached).

Tried to follow NEWBIES advice and identify the landowner first, but the car park is behind several businesses and it’s not obvious who manages it.

From what I understand, I'll need to appeal online (or via email) on day 25/26 (i.e.25th Sept 2025) as the keeper (not driver), using the blue template. 

Am I on the right track? Also should I state the obvious on the appeal regarding the lack of bay markings?

Gr1pr

Definitely not a public car park, it's a private car park,  or private parking area 

That is a windscreen pcn,  so appeal near the deadline if you wish  ( futile because OPS won't cancel it   )

Even if you do appeal it and complain about no bay markings etc, they still won't cancel it 

Its clearly a typical OPS trap site,  to catch the unwary

The alleged breach is not about bay markings , it's about not being pre-authorised  ( no E permit   )

Abu_Sumayyah

That is a windscreen pcn,  so appeal near the deadline if you wish  ( futile because OPS won't cancel it   )

My plan was to appeal—are you suggesting not to bother - from your wording it sounds like there’s no point?

Gr1pr

Its your choice to make,  but if you do appeal on any grounds,  think about the reason why you are appealing,  what is your objective   ?  if you are expecting a cancellation,  there is zero chance of it happening,  doesn't matter what is in your appeal , but any appeal should address the allegation 

So, if you know that it will be rejected,  I am asking you what your objective by appealing is   ?

Read what James said in this other thread

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81615869/#Comment_81615869

Private Parking companies are only interested in making money,  not upholding appeals

Abu_Sumayyah

Understood. My aim is to get this cancelled on a technicality, as the terms state that parking is only permitted for vehicles with a valid OPS Parking Permit or pre-authorised OPS E-Permit, whilst parked within a marked bay. Since there were no marked bays, I'm not sure how this can be upheld.

Either way, I too doubt the operator will cancel as they’re clearly after a quick pay-day, but I was only following the steps in the NEWBIES thread. What would you suggest, if not the appeals route? Wait to get to the stage of LBC?

Gr1pr

But the allegation is about not displaying an E permit,  the vehicle was not pre authorised,  so was effectively trespassing on private property,  no parking contract on offer,  no consideration,  no acceptance 

Surely any technicality would focus on the legal issues,  its nothing to do with bay markings 

The private parking industry is currently unregulated,  so who do you expect to convince about ANY technicality 

Many people have tried pointless technicality arguments,  they rarely win on a technicality  ! ( especially with IPC AOS members,  or at the IAS  )

OPS wont care, the IAS wont care either 

Court is where a resolution would occur,  within the next 6 years

I am not suggesting any course of action,  or inaction , I am pointing out the facts and what will likely happen 

You must decide what to do or not do, once you understand the topics

Abu_Sumayyah

I must admit, I’m a bit confused by your response.

A few years ago, I had a ticket where I had technically overstayed my welcome. By carefully following the instructions provided on the forum at that time, I was able to successfully challenge and overturn the case (see link below).

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6536908/dcbl-final-reminder#latest

Based on that experience, I was under the impression that similar cases could be successfully contested if the prescribed processes were followed correctly and diligently; particularly as I think this current case is somewhat more straightforward than my previous one.

What I now need to understand from the experts in this forum is whether pursuing this case is worthwhile. Ultimately, if you were in my position, what would you do?

Gr1pr

That previous case was about Met Parking,  a BPA AOS member, and DCB LEGAL,  lawyers , including an LoC and then an MCOL claim pack from the CNBC in Northampton,  the last post shows that it was currently stayed 8 months ago,  certainly not resolved,  just stayed , no further updates,  yet , certainly not "overturned"

This new OPS case is nothing like it, it's not at the court claim stage,  completely different issues,  different trade body,  so no comparison 

Abu_Sumayyah

So would you pay this one? If so, then I'll have to make payment soon given the discount. 

Gr1pr

I wouldn't,  nobody mentioned paying OPS, not unless a judge ordered it , in court,  in a judgment 

Abu_Sumayyah

Thanks for your prompt response and for all the advice you’ve provided so far.

Just so I’m clear — you wouldn’t pay this PCN from OPS. Am I right in inferring that you would therefore follow the approach suggested in the thread? This was essentially my original question, so any clarification you can provide would be greatly appreciated.