UKCPS NtK No Stopping Charge- Leeds Station

1505grandad

"Do you think this impacts my chances of avoiding the fine at all? "

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81730814#Comment_81730814

You still do not have a "fine"😉

PureVessel

Hey all,

I have received a letter of claim as expected from Moorside Legal and pasted below the LoC and the response forms if that's at all helpful.

I found an email (help@moorsidelegal.co.uk) which returns a "we do not monitor this email" response, shock. I have gone on their portal and replied disputing their charge with the NEWBIES template + an extra line on winning my previous case against DCB Legal and recovering the £800+ to hopefully scare them a little to not issue the true court claim… but let's see.

Assuming there is nothing else I need to do with this letter of claim and do not need to respond with their paper forms over mail (despite the 100+ sentences on the legal requirement for me to send forms back?)

Thanks for all your help!

kryten3000

litigationteam@moorside.co.uk ;)

Le_Kirk

Parking companies annoy me when they try to make it as difficult as possible for you (or anyone) to contact them, especially by email. Oh, this inbox is not monitored; WELL it SHOULD be especially as the fourth line on your form asks for my email address, which tells "the man on the Clapham omnibus" that they intend to communicate by email.

PureVessel

Small update- it's now been 2-3 months since receiving the letter of claim and still have not received the official claim form. Assuming that they've just dropped this and never going to send the claim form? We will see- but I've chased them every month to send the claim form with my current address to ensure they have it right and still nothing.

Can't see them being able to win this- 5 minutes in and out the station will be hard to fight against.

Coupon-mad

Moorside will send a claim form.

PureVessel

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82018433#Comment_82018433

They did indeed! 2nd June was issue date and breach of ‘no stopping’.

I have acknowledged through MCOL today and setup defence. Please could you guys review my paragraph 3 of the defendant status? The only caveat here is the picture that they have taken is somebody getting into my car for reference, stopping time was a matter of seconds/minutes max.

The Claimant alleges that the Defendant's vehicle was seen to have stopped in a 'no stopping' zone. This is denied. The vehicle appears to have been proceeding slowly and may have briefly paused for a reasonable excuse — including a moral obligation or compliance with public safety requirements — wholly unrelated to any alleged contractual terms. The act of reading a contractual notice cannot simultaneously be construed as acceptance of the same contract if doing so requires stopping, which the contract itself prohibits. The signage was inadequate to form a binding contract- they were poorly positioned, including being placed at junctions in low eye-sight. The design and positioning of the signage made it impossible to safely read the alleged terms without slowing or stopping in live traffic. The site contains several car park entrances, each with different tariffs and conditions. The signage provides no clear distinction or opportunity to select between them.

The defendant would also like to use this opportunity to respond to the claimant operator’s appeal rejection rationale 
directly…

(a) “There are multiple prominent signs along the access road advising drivers that stopping is prohibited". This is not true. The defendant submitted images in the appeal process that show the location of the first ‘no stopping’ sign that drivers see can be very easily blocked by any large van or bus. In addition to this, the driver is expected to simultaneously read the sign as well as navigating a busy and narrow roundabout safely.

(b) “Drivers are expected to comply with these clearly displayed restrictions"- firstly they are not clearly displayed (refer to above comment) and secondly it is impossible to comply with regulations that driver's don't have time to read. Refer to appeal image submitted that is quite clearly too small for a pedestrian to read without standing directly under the sign (which would be impossible given the you are claiming no stopping).

(c) "There is a designated pick-up/drop-off area for this purpose, and the vehicle was not within it"- the defendant proved this wrong during appeal with the image of the ‘drop off zone’ for drivers being completely off-limits and blocked by cones/barriers for months at Leeds station.

Coupon-mad

Far too long and reads like ChatGPT wrote it as that first paragraph is almost unreadable, it's such word soup!

Does the POC allege 'no stopping'?

This (below) is the only useful & readable bit in the draft IMHO, however (I didn't re-read the thread) you didn't blab about being the driver in the appeal did you?

""There is a designated pick-up/drop-off area for this purpose, and the vehicle was not within it"- the defendant proved this wrong during appeal with the image of the ‘drop off zone’ for drivers being completely off-limits and blocked by cones/barriers for months at Leeds station."

Le_Kirk

With an issue date of 02/06/26 and having completed the AoS in a timely manner your defence deadline date is 4.00 p.m. on 06/07/26

Dear Moorside, if I see an employee of UKCPS or Moorside on the road in front of my car, shall I stop or keep ploughing through them?

PureVessel

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82035112#Comment_82035112

Thanks for the feedback. How does the below sound?

Denial of Stopping: the defendant denies that the vehicle 'stopped' under the land’s restrictions. A brief moment to pause to safely drive through a busy junction, react to traffic, attempt to read signage, or ensure the safety of the public does not constitute parking or demonstrate acceptance of a contract.

Inadequate Signage: The signage at this location is incapable of creating a binding contract. The first sign on entry is on a busy roundabout and is completely obscured if the vehicle is behind larger vehicles (such as buses and vans), in addition to the driver needing to keep their attention on road safety. The secondary signs within the land have extremely small font and are very difficult to read from a moving vehicle, creating an impossible scenario where a driver must stop to read the terms, yet is also fined for doing so.

Blocked Drop-Off Zone: The operator’s objection appeal states that the vehicle should have used the designated pick-up/drop-off area- this is misleading. At the time, the official “drop-off zone” (as marked on floor) at Leeds Station was entirely blocked off by cones and barriers, making it physically inaccessible. The driver was left with no viable alternative, and any brief pause was a matter of necessity and public safety.

How does that sound?

For reference… here is the photo below on entry to Leeds station with “drop off” marked on floor behind the barriers. There seems to be some back route around the cones but it’s clearly misleading and impossible to understand without being able to stop for any amount of seconds.

Here is the POC…

“The Claim is for an unpaid Parking Charge issued for a breach of contractual terms on XXXX at Leeds City Station Leeds LS14DY to vehicle XXXX. The signage displayed at the site set out contractual terms and offered a contractual licence, which the Defendant accepted by parking. The Claimant has authority to operate the site and issue charges. The breach was: No Stopping. The Defendant is liable as the driver and/or keeper, in contract and/or pursuant to POFA Sch 4, and the charge remains unpaid despite demand. AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS 1. £170.00 being the total of the PCN. 2. Costs and Court fees. The claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year from 04/09/2025 to 28/05/2026 on £170.00 and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of E0.02.”