Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd – Appeal Guide

Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd are also known as PCM UK Ltd.  They recently left the British Parking Association and are now part of the Independent Parking Committee.

Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd are a prolific isuuer of Parking Charge Notices and issue their notices by hand to windscreens and do not use Automatic Number Plate Recognition system like companies such as Parking Eye do.

They are known to issue a large number of PCN’s at  the following locations:

• Bluewater town shopping centre in Stone, Kent
• Meadowhall shopping centre in Sheffield
• Salisbury Village
• Ravenside shopping centre in Bexhill
• Windsor Castle car park
• Apartment complexes
• Private estates

Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd issue a large number of PCN’s in apartment complexes and private estates.  A common scenario, is for someone who either owns or leases an apartement (that includes a parking space) receives a PCN for parking in their own space.

For debt collection, Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd make use of Newlyn Debt Collection Ltd for notices that haven’t been paid.

Parking Control Management in the media

The Daily Mail reported on 14 September 2009 that Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd could became the first wheel-clamping firm in Britain to be given an anti-social banning order (ASBO) effectively banning it from operating in certain towns.

Windsor and Maidenhead Councils decided there was a need to stop is predatory conduct because it was giving the area a bad name with tourists.  It decided to debate whether the firm can be barred from the towns by serving it with an antisocial behaviour order (Asbo)  -  a measure originally designed to crack down on thugs and hooligans.

Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd has been accused of using deception to trap tourists and other motorists. The company is believed to generate hundreds of thousands of pounds a year from income from clamping.

Town hall sources said that the clamping company’s staff stalk the Windsor Castle car park where tourists unwittingly overstay because signs are hard to understand or because zealous operatives clamp their vehicles if they are only seconds over their allotted time’.

Colin Rayner, lead member for highways and streetcare with the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead Council said: “We regard what this firm is doing as legalised extortion” and “We now believe that private clamping should be banned. The firm is giving Windsor and surrounding areas a bad name and we want to put a stop to it”.

PCM is headed up by managing director Ian Cordingley.  Town hall officials also want to target David Blake, a business consultant who works for the firm. .

Parking Control Management – POPLA result

Here is the result of a POPLA appeal for a Parking Control Management Parking Charge Notice.  The letter from POPLA says “the signage produced in evidence by Parking Control Management states that a parking charge notice would be issued for “failure to comply”.  This wording appears to indicate that the parking charge represnts damages for breach of a parking contract.  Accordingly, the charge must be a genuine pre-estimate of loss to Parking Control Management.  The estimate must be based upon loss flowing from a breach of parking terms”.  Further down the letter from POPLA states that the burden is on Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd to prove the charge justified a genuine pre-estimate of loss, and that accordingly the appeal must be allowed

Parking Control Management – my story

Mavis Maynard and her husband Brian fell foul of Parking Control Management when they parked outside a boarded-up office in Maidenhead for less than half an hour to visit the library.  When they returned, they found their car had been towed away by Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd and they faced demands for £375  – consisting of a £200 removal fee, £130 to release the car, £40 for ‘storage’ and a £5 credit-card fee. Mrs Maynard had three appeals to the British Parking Association dismissed before the Automible Association decided to help her.  Eventually her £375 was finally returned, with a short note from David Blake apologising for ‘any inconvenience’.  Ms Maynard said the firms practices were ‘unacceptable’. .