Flashpark charge

Tottibo

Hi there. I have a couple of questions regarding a parking charge I received in the post two weeks ago. I've had a Google and the street is on a private residential estate and 'governed by a deed of covenant, administered by trustees.' The letter is from Flashpark and it says the street is permitted parking for residents only.

In regards to the newbies thread, I should be complaining to the landowner. Since the residents are the landowners would this be pointless?

The appeals process on the back of the letter states you can only appeal in writing which seems very dodgy. I would like to avoid using the post if I can complain and get it cancelled instead. Especially since it seems like flashpark will reject the appeal no matter what...

Thanks in advance for any advice :)

James_Poisson

It is most likely that Flashpark have been engaged by a managing agent, but what will be the basis of your complaint to the landowner why did you think you had a good cause to park there?

This will be more about the NTK and the signage, where exactly was this and can you post a redacted image of the paperwork, Flashpark haven't always been the brightest, is the NTK compliant?

If you can only appeal in writing that's it some parking operators work like that, this bunch of jokers are amateurs and always have been .

Flashpark was born out of a restaurant owners frustration at people parking in his parking spot so he invented the talking parking ticket, then realised he could make easy money out of parking scams. This is basically a DIY system you sign up on line, stick up some signs they provide at a cost, take a photo of any vehicle you want, send it in with any old made up infringement, Flashpark get the details from the DVLA and send out a begging invoice.

How this gets past the BPA audit I don't know, or maybe I do!

ChirpyChicken

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6664191/flashpark-charge

yes one of the few firms which only allow appeals via the post

Tottibo

1000049825.jpg

PXL_20260421_121307477.jpg

Yeah the letter looks like crap. They can't spell either.

The street is next to a train station and I parked there to catch the train. I've never had a problem before and there's literally only one sign that I did not see at the time. I don't live far away so I normally walk and there are no signs on the street the other side of the station or anywhere on the estate. I genuinely didn't know that there was a problem parking there and was probably in a rush to catch the train. I've uploaded the redacted docs for reference.

Should I send the template from the newbies thread to appeal or should I make more of an effort? I don't have long to get the letters in the post and I know what Royal Mail are like..

MothballsWallet

@Tottibo If you do post, get a free proof of posting (used to be called a certificate of posting, not even God knows why they changed the name) - you can use that to show you did send something, and it's deemed delivered 2 working days later, with the burden of proof being on the recipient if they claim they didn't receive it.

I'm sure one of the more regular posters will correct me if need be.

Tottibo

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81971958#Comment_81971958

Thanks for the tip! I'll ask at the post office. I saw on another thread someone saying to send two copies of the appeal separately so they can't claim it wasn't received twice. Might be worth the extra postage I reckon

Umkomaas

Your appeal will be rejected (regardless of how many copies you send), so don’t be surprised. Get your POPLA code from the rejection, then win it there.

Their NtK is a painfully woeful attempt at being PoFA compliant (it is definitely not compliant), which will be a winning point at POPLA. The photo of your car proves nothing in respect of the location at which they say it was parked - that could be anywhere, given the lack of any identifiers. Have a look on their website at what other pictures they have (if any). This was taken by a local resident, not a Flash Park employee who would be likely (but not guaranteed!) more adept.