UKPC / ZZPS – Disabled Bay at Cwmbran, Blue Badge Present, Appeal Rejected by Email to Spam – Advice

Stevecg

Background

We are Shared Lives carers supporting a disabled gentleman who has limited awareness and poor spatial perception due to his disability. He holds a valid national Blue Badge.

The Cwmbran Shopping car park is free for 3 hours for everyone, so there is no financial incentive to misuse a disabled bay.

We parked in a disabled bay after carrying out a risk assessment:

He struggles with spatial awareness and cannot reliably judge the distance when opening the car door.

Using a normal bay risked him hitting another car or stepping into moving traffic.

Letting him out of the car outside the bays would have placed him in an active traffic area where cars are constantly driving in and out looking for spaces.

We used the disabled bay purely for safeguarding and safety, not to gain any advantage.

What went wrong with the Blue Badge

The Blue Badge sits inside a fold‑out sleeve with a dedicated slot where the plastic Blue Badge permit card is meant to sit.

On the day:

We placed the Blue Badge sleeve on the dashboard as usual.

The enforcement officer’s photographs show that the plastic permit card was not in its slot inside the sleeve.

We did not realise this at the time.

The actual plastic permit card was in a separate green folder, which we had with us all along, but didn’t realise had been removed from the Blue Badge sleeve.

So:

The Blue Badge and permit were valid.

We had them with us.

But the permit card was not sitting in its sleeve at the moment the officer took the photos.

This was a genuine human mistake, not misuse or deception.

Appeal and communication issues

We appealed immediately via UKPC’s website, explaining the situation.

• We later provided photographs showing:the Blue Badge sleeve,the empty permit slot,the separate green folder,and the valid plastic permit card.

All previous correspondence from UKPC had been sent by post, so we reasonably expected the appeal outcome to be sent by post as well.

Instead:

UKPC sent a single email asking for further evidence.

That email went straight into our spam folder.

We never saw it and therefore did not respond within their timeframe.

We did not receive:

a rejection letter,

a POPLA code,

a reminder,

or a second request for evidence.

The next thing we received was a debt recovery letter from ZZPS demanding £170.We had been waiting for a response to our appeal and had no idea UKPC had emailed us.

Contact with UKPC and ZZPS

After receiving the £170 demand:

We phoned UKPC.

We phoned ZZPS.

Both told us there was “nothing that could be done” and that we must pay.

We then wrote to both:

asking ZZPS to cease escalation, and

asking UKPC to reconsider the appeal because their email had gone to spam.

UKPC later emailed us stating:

it was too late,

they would not look at our evidence,

and we must deal with the debt collection agency.

We consider this unreasonable, given that their choice to rely on a single email (when all previous communication had been by post) is what prevented us from receiving their request.

The letter I have now sent to UKPC

Below is the full text of the letter I have now sent to UKPC.

[Your Name][Your Address][Postcode][Email Address][Date]

To: UK Parking Control Ltd[Insert UKPC Address]

Subject: Formal Complaint and Appeal – PCN [Insert PCN Number]

Dear Sir/Madam,

I write regarding the above Parking Charge Notice issued on [insert date] for parking in a disabled bay.

An appeal was submitted through your official website explaining that a valid Blue Badge was present at the time. The disabled person we were caring for holds a valid Blue Badge, and it was displayed inside the Blue Badge sleeve on the dashboard. However, the plastic permit card, which normally sits inside the dedicated sleeve within the Blue Badge holder, had been inadvertently removed and placed in a separate green folder. We did not realise this at the time. The enforcement officer’s photographs show the sleeve without the permit card, but we have since provided clear photographic evidence showing the valid permit card and the green folder it was in.

All previous correspondence from UKPC had been sent by post, and we therefore had a legitimate expectation that your appeal response would also be sent by post.

Instead, your request for further evidence was sent solely by email. This email went directly into our spam folder and was therefore not reasonably received. We only became aware of its existence after receiving a letter from ZZPS demanding an additional £70. This was the first indication that the appeal had progressed or that further information had been requested. This constitutes a procedural failure and deprived us of a fair opportunity to respond within the appeal window.

For the avoidance of doubt, the onus is not on us to repeatedly chase for updates when no communication has been received. The responsibility lies with UKPC to ensure that appeal correspondence is delivered by a reliable and established method. As all previous communication had been sent by post, we had a legitimate expectation that your appeal outcome or evidence request would be sent the same way. Sending a single email—which was not received—constitutes a failure of service and renders the appeal deadline invalid.

Furthermore, if UKPC believed additional evidence was required, it was incumbent upon you to issue a follow‑up communication when no response was received. A single unacknowledged email, sent without any postal duplicate, does not constitute reasonable or reliable communication. A fair appeals process requires that appellants are given a genuine opportunity to respond. A second letter or reminder would have prevented the foreseeable risk of an email being diverted to spam. Your failure to issue such a follow‑up further undermines the validity of the appeal rejection and reinforces that the appeal remains unresolved.

Upon discovering the spam‑folder email, we contacted both UKPC and ZZPS by telephone. Both parties insisted that nothing further could be done and that payment was required. We then wrote to both parties, requesting that ZZPS cease escalation and that UKPC reconsider the appeal. We subsequently received an email from UKPC stating that it was “too late” and that we must deal with the debt collection agency. This is unacceptable given that your failure to communicate via the established method prevented us from receiving your request for evidence.

At the time of parking, the Cwmbran Shopping car park allowed three hours of free parking and there were numerous standard spaces available. We chose the disabled bay solely because we were transporting a disabled individual who requires additional space to safely enter and exit the vehicle. The wider access provided by a disabled bay was necessary to prevent injury, avoid damage to our vehicle or neighbouring vehicles, and to assist the disabled passenger safely and with dignity. There was no financial incentive to misuse a disabled bay, as the entire car park is free for the permitted period. Had we been aware that the plastic permit card was not in its sleeve, we would have simply allowed the disabled passenger to exit the vehicle first and then parked in a standard bay. The only reason we used the disabled bay was to meet the needs of the disabled person we were caring for, which we were fully entitled to do.

BPA Code of Practice BreachesYour actions appear to breach several sections of the BPA Code of Practice, including:

The requirement to communicate appeal outcomes clearly and reliably.

The requirement to allow a reasonable opportunity to respond.

The requirement to suspend enforcement and debt recovery while an appeal is active.

The requirement to consider mitigating circumstances, particularly where disability is involved.

Equality Act 2010 ConsiderationsThe disabled person’s Blue Badge and permit were valid, and the parking was for their benefit. As carers transporting and assisting a disabled individual, we fall within the scope of the Equality Act 2010. The Act requires reasonable adjustments and fair consideration of disability‑related circumstances. Penalising a minor display error in these circumstances may amount to discrimination arising from disability.

Cease and Desist – Debt RecoveryIn light of the above, you are formally instructed to cease and desist from sending, authorising, or permitting any further enforcement activity, including all correspondence from ZZPS Ltd or any other debt recovery agent. The case must be placed on hold immediately pending proper resolution of this complaint.

Unrecoverable Additional FeesAny added fees (e.g., ZZPS’s £70) are not recoverable in law and would not be upheld by a court. Should a judge ultimately determine liability due to the display error, we would accept payment of the original reduced amount of £60 only.

Reservation of RightsAll rights are reserved, including the right to pursue costs for unreasonable behaviour under CPR 27.14(2)(g).

Required ActionAccordingly, we require UKPC to either:

(a) immediately cease and desist from any further enforcement activity, including all correspondence from ZZPS Ltd or any other debt recovery agent, and issue written confirmation that this PCN is cancelled and the matter is now closed; or

(b) if you do not agree to cancel the PCN, we formally request that you proceed directly to issuing a claim in the County Court. We welcome the opportunity to present the full facts, evidence, and procedural failings before a judge.

No further debt recovery letters, threats, or fee escalations will be acknowledged. The only acceptable outcomes at this stage are written confirmation of cancellation or a formal Letter Before Claim compliant with the Pre‑Action Protocol for Debt Claims.

Yours faithfully,[Your Name]

What I’m asking the forum

Is this letter appropriate and proportionate for this stage?

Is there anything you would add, remove, or rephrase?

• Does the focus on:the free 3‑hour car park,the safeguarding decision to use the disabled bay,the valid Blue Badge and permit, andthe spam‑folder communication failurealign with best practice for defending this kind of PCN?

Any guidance on next steps or improvements to my position would be very welcome.

Stubod

..similar thing happened to my mom….parked with her (valid) blue badge upside down / wrong way around….got a ticket…appealed and lost….nothing we could do….unfortunately that's the world we live in….

Jame4ters

Stop ringing them. They don’t care or want to help. Don’t pay them. Read the “Newbies” thread. It will assist.

Coupon-mad

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81909611#Comment_81909611

Yes but surely she didn't pay?!

Come on, nobody has to pay private parking invoices all the time the industry remains unregulated..

To the OP:

• stop.
• you are meant to ignore ZZPS
• do not send that
• Read the NEWBIES thread

This sector is unregulated, acts like the Wild West and you can safely ignore the letters as long as you tell them if you move house and come back if ever you get a Claim Form.