Group Nexus PCN, keeper, but not driver. Two car parks adjacent with shared entrance.

skuther

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81864355#Comment_81864355

So it does: "but don't feel you have to answer their questions, you should write a detailed appeal and attach it as a PDF"

thanks.

skuther

POPLA Outcome:

Appeal has been withdrawn by the operator, Withdrawn on 17/02/2026

Withdrawal reasons: After further investigation we have decided to cancel this Charge

They didn't even submit any evidence in the end. They clearly saw they didn't have a leg to stand on.

I am annoyed that I didn't see any of their evidence pack. Although somewhat relieved that they won't try chasing me through the courts.

After speaking to the health centre management team however, they stillplan to pursue GroupNexus through the courts (I may have mentioned Coupon-Mad's advice to them…) and they have asked me to attend a meeting with their solicitor to share my experiences.

Coupon-mad

Very good.

Needs an emergency injunction IMHO, and all costs charged to Group Nexus.

The cameras have only been put in recently - and everyone who goes down it is now being assumed to be "parking" in the shopping centre, even though another car park is there also.

The NHS health centre car park (circled in red) is privately owned by the health centre NOT the shopping centre. I have confirmed that the health centre don't have a contract with Group Nexus.

The shared access road has been in continuous use to the health centre since the 1950s! - at least 60years - which would satisfy Easement (Right of way) by prescription law (which is over 20years) even if the access road is privately owned.

There is no evidence that parking has taken place on their land - only that a car has been along a shared access road (highlighted with the red line below). Here is the Satellite view image to demonstrate.

kryten3000

I would also be approaching local media as many people may have paid up already with an end goal to get no only get GroupNexus to stop issuing PCNs to health centre visitors, but also to refund all payments made for these bogus charge notices.

There's a Data Protection angle here too - GroupNexus have obtained and processed keeper data without "reasonable cause". No wonder they chickened out at the POPLA stage.

Coupon-mad

In many cases it will be 'special category data' as well (motorists with any type of disability or longterm medical condition).

skuther

We met with the lawyers and the outcome of that was that they found out that as far back as 1988, Peterlee health centre already has a right of access!

Formal legal opinion:

" In simple terms, this gives you and your staff a legal right to use Fleming Place to travel to and from Peterlee Health Centre. It is a property right which the shopping centre must respect and cannot take away or unreasonably obstruct.

On the facts you have explained, your staff are using the access road solely for the purpose of reaching Peterlee Health Centre and then parking within the Peterlee Health Centre car park. They are not parking or remaining on the shopping centre’s land. Their use of Fleming Place is therefore exactly what the right of way is intended to allow, namely lawful passage over Fleming Place to access Peterlee Health Centre.

The difficulty arises because the shopping centre has introduced a camera-based enforcement system which issues penalty charges where vehicles are present on or near the site for more than a set period of time. Although this may have been designed as part of a general parking management scheme, it also appears to be capturing vehicles that are simply using Fleming Place to reach Peterlee Health Centre. As a result, staff are being penalised not for parking on the shopping centre’s land, but for the time taken to exercise their right of access.

From a legal perspective, while the shopping centre is entitled to manage and control parking on its own land, it must not operate that management in a way that interferes with your legal right of access. A right of way must remain practical and usable in a normal way. If an enforcement system has the effect of discouraging or penalising ordinary use of Fleming Place, there is a risk that it may be interfering with your property rights.

Your separate licence to occupy parking spaces on the shopping centre’s land is a distinct arrangement and does not affect your right to use Fleming Place. It does not give the shopping centre a basis to impose charges in relation to lawful access to your own site.

In summary, you have an absolute legal right to use Fleming Place to reach Peterlee Health Centre, without obstruction or penalty and your current use appears to fall squarely within that right. The enforcement regime being applied by the shopping centre may therefore be inconsistent with your access rights, as it appears to penalise normal and lawful use of the route."

"…it may be necessary to involve a property litigation specialist to consider formally challenging the enforcement measures and putting the shopping centre on formal notice. If you are happy for me to do so, I can pass your details onto one of my colleagues in the property litigation team to consider next steps as appropriate. "

Yes please 😊

Coupon-mad

Very good! Do that. And apply for all costs against the shopping centre landowner.

😁

1505grandad

Yet the DVLA will still sell the motorists private data without due cause.

Car1980

The reasonable cause though is that they are willing to pay £2.50. Anybody wanting to pay money must have a cause for doing so by virtue of the fact.

It's almost as if it's the worst legislation ever constructed (apart from the water bosses bonus loophole 😂)