[NIP Wizard] Disagree with time shown leaving Parking Eye car park Options

[the1lemming]

NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? -
Date of the offence: - January 2022
Date of the NIP: - 0 days after the offence
Date you received the NIP: - 3 days after the offence
Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - The Range Blackpool
Was the NIP addressed to you? - Yes
Was the NIP sent by first class post, second class or recorded delivery? - Not known
If your are not the Registered Keeper, what is your relationship to the vehicle? -
How many current points do you have? - 0
Provide a description of events (if you know what happened) telling us as much about the incident as possible - some things that may seem trivial to you may be important, so don't leave anything out. Please do not post personal details for obvious reasons - I attended The Range on 6-1-22.
Before I left my vehicle I set a timer of 1 hour and 50 minutes so that I could return to my car in good time so not to go past the 2 hour limit.

In 2013 I was late by 5 minutes in a Car Park run by Parking Eye and received a similar payment notification. Since then I have always set a timer to ensure that I am never late in a Parking Eye car park.

NIP Wizard Responses
These were the responses used by the Wizard to arrive at its recommendation:
Have you received a NIP? - Yes
Are you the Registered Keeper of the vehicle concerned (is your name and address on the V5/V5C)? - Yes
Did the first NIP arrive within 14 days? - Yes
Although you are the Registered Keeper, were you also the keeper of the vehicle concerned (the person normally responsible for it) at the time of the alleged offence? - Yes
Were you driving? - Yes
Which country did the alleged offence take place in? - England

NIP Wizard Recommendation
Based on these responses the Wizard suggested that this course of action should be considered:

• The law requires you to provide the information requested in the Section 172 notice within the 28 day period, naming yourself as the driver. If you are considering obtaining formal legal advice, do so before returning the notice.
  
  You should note that there is nothing to be gained by responding any earlier than you have to at any stage of the process. You are likely to receive a Conditional Offer of a Fixed Penalty (COFP) and further reminder(s). If you want to continue the fight, you should ignore all correspondence from the police until you receive a summons. You need to understand from the outset that while you will receive much help and support from members on the forums, you will need to put time and effort into fighting your case and ultimately be prepared to stand up in court to defend yourself.

Generated by the PePiPoo NIP Wizard v3.3.2: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 12:27:03 +0000

[Advertisement]

[The Rookie]

'
As it is I'm not happy with this claim for £100 which in my opinion is excessive compared to companies that charge by the hour.

Unfortunately the contract on the signage you accepted by parking means you agreed to pay £100. At least that is how PE and the court will see it unless you can contest one of the critical aspects of their case. If you aren’t happy to pay the agreed sum for parking then, as the Supreme Court put it, you just need a watch.

Was the signage ‘there to be seen’? you don’t seem to deny this.
Does the signage create a contract? Probably as PE are one of the most professional in this.
Do they have the legal standing to demand this money? As above, almost certainly yes.

Yes the range are scummy, they will claim it’s not their car park which is partially true, and won’t help you at all. it’s owned or leased by the holding company that also owns the range stores. They don’t give a 5h1t for their customers so the logical answer is don’t shop there.

[the1lemming]

Thank you everybody for your advice.

[Sheffield Dave]

As it is I'm not happy with this claim for £100 which in my opinion is excessive compared to companies that charge by the hour.

The Supreme Court in Parking Eye v Beavis 2015, decided that £85 was "commercially justifiable" for a 50-ish minute overstay on a 2H free car park - both to deter all-day stays for a nearby train station, and to fund the enforcement scheme. This ruling blew almost all arguments out of the water concerning loss, excessiveness, fairness etc. So don't waste your time there.