Need opinion: Any reasonable grounds to challenge this?

SCompx

Hello everyone,

I previously challenged a PCN and managed to get it withdrawn just before the hearing, as I was confident it wasn’t my mistake.

This time, though, I’m much less certain and would really value your opinion on whether it’s worth appealing.

Here’s what happened:
I was visiting the hospital but couldn’t find any parking, even after going around a few times. I then noticed a car park opposite the hospital with plenty of available spaces, so I parked there. There wasn’t a payment machine on site, and it directed me to use an app, which I didn’t already have. I didn’t fully read all the signage at the time.

I downloaded the app, noted the location code, and went into the hospital, planning to pay once the app was installed. However, after installing and registering, when I tried to pay, I received a message saying: “Sorry, you are not allowed to stay. Site is currently closed.”

By that point, it felt too late anyway to move the car (already 10+ min in and 10+ min walk back to car), so I left it there during my visit (around 1 hour 35 minutes total) and moved it as soon as I returned.

As expected, I’ve now received a PCN with message "Private Land - parking for petron only". I’m unsure whether I have reasonable grounds to challenge it or if it’s better to just pay it.

I’ve attached the notice here — any thoughts or advice would be really appreciated.

Coupon-mad

Whilst you won't win on appeal (unless it was a non-POFA NTK), because ParkingEye use DCB Legal this case will go the same way as your 2024 case that they discontinued.

Therefore, ignore it and let it go to a claim. Facts don't matter because DCB group work on a numbers game, with no sign that anybody looks at facts or 'decides' to discontinue.

Your 2024 case wasn't discontinued because you were "confident it wasn’t my mistake." It was ALWAYS going to end up discontinued as that's DCB Legal's MO.

Same with this one.

1. Did you park on a weekday within the 'patrons only' time?
2. What does the NTK say on the back about the reason for the charge?
3. Does it have the POFA paragraph?

SCompx

Thanks for the encouragement @Coupon-mad — I really appreciate it.

1. Yes, I parked there on a weekday, but I didn’t realize it was for patrons only. I only noticed the “Tariffs” and “How to pay” signs at the time, and thought will download and pay on the app.
2. It says "The signage, which is clearly displayed at the entrance to and throughout the car park, states that this is private land and that the car park is managed by ParkingEye Ltd. In addition the signage state that as a patron only car park, a Parking Charge is applicable if the motorist fails to enter their full, correct vehicle registration into the terminal in reception/store. The signage also contains further terms and conditions associated with this car park by which those who park in the car park agree to be bound. By not gaining the appropriate permit/authorization or by remaining at the car park for longer than permitted, in accordance with the terms and conditions set out in signage, the Parking Charge is now payable to ParkingEye Ltd (as the Creditor)
3. Yes, It does,

Attached here for ref.

Regards,

Coupon-mad

OK, ignore it and let it go to a claim. Facts don't matter because DCB group work on a numbers game, with no sign that anybody looks at facts or 'decides' to discontinue. Let it play out.

Tell them if you move house.

SCompx

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81965201#Comment_81965201

Great thanks :)