Oak Legal Services LBC

MrTottenham123

Good Morning All,

I’m back once again but this time I’ve received an LBC from Oak Legal Services which from reading on the forum sound like another scamming company!

Context:

Received a parking ticket whilst watching a friend play football which never used to have parking charges.

1) No signs upon entering the facility to advise of T&C’s, before you drive down a long road to enter the main car park.

2) There is a camera as you drive in which I don’t know if it’s an ANPR but there is no mention of this on the letter or photos of my vehicle to confirm. This will be something I will focus on later down the line once I found out, because it’s at the start of the drive in down the long road, so there should be signs at the entrance to advise but there isn’t.

3) The only signage seen near the entrance is a bit of laminated paper, stuck on with some black tape. (Very professional and who can even read this when they’re driving a right hand steering car lol)

4) I have complained to the clubhouse as ultimately I just had to put my reg into a tablet to confirm my attendance, which is also new that I didn't know about. But they have advised me I have to take it up with the parking company directly, but they have provided me with an email confirming my attendance on the day of the match once I provided them with specific details only they or the team would know.

Thankfully I’m familiar with the process now since my last matter with Moorside so I shouldn’t need much help with the steps from the Newbie thread, but just wanted to create a new thread so I can update others on my progress.

Email sent to acknowledge the LBC, now we wait.

Pictures attached for reference.

Camera can be seen in the back of this picture with the box underneath it. Looks to be just a normal camera maybe?

patient_dream

As you can see, OAK is a trading name of ZZPS, the infamous debt collector run by OSNER famous fot adding FAKE amounts such as the £70

As such OAK are misleading you and a court with a FAKE claim which is DOUBLE RECOVERY and not allowed by the courts.

If OAK actually take you to court they will no doubt be spanked for a fake double recovery claim and … award you costs

And interest @8% .. most judges will not allow this

What excuse will OAK MAKE for a fake double recovery claim

OldBugger

So there are no signs anywhere except the one stating that the car park is operated by Londoneast-uk?

Yet in the LBC it states the parking charge is due to one parking solution ltd.

By the looks of it it will be an easy win on so many counts.

MrJenkinsEsq

Your VRM is visible in the body of the letter.

MrTottenham123

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82122887#Comment_82122887

good point, I’ve not actually been back into the car park since but I assume there will be signs for One Parking in the actual car park itself, but upon entry onto the site there are no signs and it’s a good 100/200 metre drive before you then reach the car park, along with the camera that you can see in the last photo (not 100% if it’s a standard camera or ANPR)

Im not sure what the rules are, but I thought they had to show clear signs and the T&C’s before I enter the site in it’s entirely, not once I’m already in and driving down the long road to the car park. I could be wrong and if so, then that’s my fault.

But the only sign upon entry to the site in question is that small paper one lol

I’ll make a trip back down there this weekend and get some photos of any other signs I can find

Gr1pr

Study the relevant Code of Practice to see what the signage requirements are

OldBugger

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82123234#Comment_82123234

You'll find that here, page 29 where it states…

That's a fail already. The entrance sign is displayed by the land owner not the operator.

And the second fail. b) there is no referal to terms and conditions or additional signage.

Car1980

Entrance signage makes no reference to T&Cs or anything contractual anyway. All it says is "entering this land will make you a trespasser". Thus only the landowner can sue and for peppercorn damages at most. Not that his home made sign would even be prominent enough anyway.

Coupon-mad

That's a 360 degree CCTV camera, often used by One Parking Solution.

However, there does have to be entrance sign and GDPR 'privacy notice' info before you cross the threshold.

I'd read OPS' complaints policy and privacy policy. You can include this in a complaint email to the DPO at OPS:

1. When crossing the threshold into what looks like an unremarkable, twelve feet high, pole-mounted CCTV camera's field of vision, the only signage a driver could have seen is a bit of laminated paper, stuck on a yellow & black gatepost.
2. The piece of paper says the site is "operated by Londoneast-uk." OPS is not mentioned. There is no 'P' entrance sign and nothing to advise a driver that this is managed 'private land'. There is also no GDPR privacy notice, nor a camera surveillance warning.
3. These are misleading omissions which contravene the Private Parking Sector Single Code of Practice as well as consumer protection law (CMA remit) and also UK GDPR and current data use laws (ICO remit).
4. For a camera system to legally function under the law and current ICO rules, the entrance sign must satisfy both the Code of Practice and data use/surveillance laws. These require: - (a) clear disclosure that ANPR/CCTV enforcement is in use before the recording field begins, and (b) the exact identity of the operator (data controller) and (c) direct contact details or a URL to read the operator's full 'privacy notice'.
5. OPS has breached all signage and data information requirements and obtained keeper data without reasonable cause. Articles 13 & 14 of the UK GDPR defines the right to be informed, which requires organisations to provide clear, concise, and honest privacy information to individuals about how their personal data is collected and used.
6. Under the ICO's transparency framework, the entrance signage must serve as a Layered Privacy Notice. To meet the required standard for camera-surveilled environments, the signage must deliver specific information before the driver passes the camera. It must be clear that an automated camera tracking system is in use and how the data will be used.
7. If the entrance sign fails to direct the motorist to a data controller identity or privacy policy detailing their rights, the data collection fails the core legal principle of being "fair, lawful and transparent".
8. As you will be well aware, in July 2026 the CMA has published an open letter to the industry and government, summarising what they believe are matters that potentially breach consumer law.
9. What's OPS' excuse? Is the CCTV camera yours and did you obtain prior planning permission for it? When? And on what date did enforcement commence?

I will escalate the matter to the ICO and CMA when you reply, no doubt toeing the well-trodden IPC path of shutting down my dispute and data objection and continuing to demand inflated money that is not legally owed.

MrTottenham123

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82123752#Comment_82123752

thanks so much for the assistance!

Other than the laminated ‘sign’ there’s just advertisement boards at the front of the property and nothing else. I don’t live far from the area so I’m going to pop down there to see if any new signage or anything has changed since.

Will have a look at their T&C’s now and put together a complaint email.

Coupon-mad

I wrote your complaint email, above, word for word.