Leicester Sports Centre, one of the longest-standing grassroots indoor sports facilities of its kind in the UK, is facing a serious threat of closure due to around 250 PCNs being issued to its users parked in its expressly granted spaces in its lease.  Despite the Underlease expressly granting Leicester Sports Centre rights to use designated parking spaces to the attention of the parking operator, the parking enforcement scheme has continued enforcement contrary to IPC regulations, resulting in numerous PCNs being issued to users of the facility correctly parked in the Sports Centre’s expressly granted parking spaces.

Leicester Sports Centre’s concern is that enforcement has been introduced in a shared estate car park where leasehold parking rights, long-standing community use, access routes and enforcement boundaries are all disputed. The enforcement boundary relied upon by the parking operator conflicts with the Sports Centre’s Underlease plan and the spaces expressly granted for its use. This has created confusion, user deterrence, complaints, appeals, and significant disruption to the Sports Centre’s revenue streams to the delight of the Head Lease Holder, who is opposing lease renewal.  In this case the Head Lease Holder has been able to weaponise unlawful parking enforcement to bleed the sports facility dry of its income streams.

A user that got 3 tickets in 3 weeks appealed to the Independent Appeals Service from which it became apparent that the operator relied on enforcement maps, boundary descriptions and assertions of authority which have failed to respect the Sports Centre’s leasehold parking rights. This has left ordinary users — including families, volunteers, disabled users, community groups and grassroots sports participants — exposed to incorrect PCNs causing distress to the recipients.

This case highlights a wider problem in the regulation of private parking enforcement in shared commercial and community car parks. Private parking operators should not be permitted to enforce across disputed areas without clear landholder authority, accurate boundary mapping, transparent signage, and robust safeguards for spaces already granted to tenants, occupiers or community facilities. Where a live dispute exists over parking rights, enforcement boundaries, or the operator’s authority, PCNs should be suspended or restricted until the position is properly clarified.

Leicester Sports Centre has gathered evidence including photographs, PCNs, appeal material, lease plans, correspondence and user complaints which demonstrate the unfairness and unreliability of the current enforcement arrangements.  This evidence should not only protect the Sports Centre and its users, but should also prompt wider scrutiny of how private parking enforcement is regulated where community facilities depend on shared parking to survive.  Furthermore, appeals submitted on identical wording were accepted on some occasions and rejected on others.  A flurry of 28 PCNs issued before the cameras were supposed to be live have not been refunded.  

We therefore call on local authorities, regulators and national government to strengthen the rules governing private parking enforcement in shared car parks. Operators should be required to prove clear authority, provide accurate enforcement boundaries, protect expressly granted tenant parking rights, and suspend enforcement where there is a genuine unresolved dispute.  

This is about protecting community facilities from being damaged by opaque, aggressive or poorly regulated parking enforcement. Grassroots sports centres depend on access, trust and affordability. When users are deterred by unfair or disputed PCNs, the whole community suffers. Please support Leicester Sports Centre and help call for fairer, clearer and more accountable private parking enforcement.