Parkingeye dedicated car park PCN, opinions? Options

[jonnybg]

This is a Parkingeye car park (not a supermarket)

The sign (1B apparently) said pay at the payment machine any time before exiting the car park


What is actually meant was pay in Advance, before leaving your car


on returning to my car I attempted to pay , expected the machine to know what was owed. Machine only dispensed tickets in advance.
Not knowing how long i'd been I bought £2 ticket but realising impossible to pay for the actual stay!

Got home and was anticipating a PCN

spoke to Parkingeye helpline who advised signing up with good2Go (which I did) and was also advised that anything owed would be taken within 3 days.

PCN received dated 13 days after parking.
I appealed and lost and now have an appeal with POPLA pending

I cant access the first two appeals i sent but below is my "comments" that they asked for once they'd received the operator evidence.

Should i lose the POPLA appeal what are my options?

Final comments to POPLA

On page 33, Sign type 1B specifically states to pay at the payment machine "any time before exiting the car park"
I took that to mean before I drive away and exit the car park. Is there any other way to take that statement?
The statement I realise now is totally misleading. It should say to pay in Advance, before leaving your car.
As explained in my original submission on returning to my car I entered my registration number and expected the machine to tell me how much was owed. I could not recall how long the stay was and thought it was within 1 hour.
I attempted to pay for my stay and indeed did pay £2 and got a ticket. As evidenced by the operator on page 37 and also by the actual ticket I submitted to the operator appeal process and also to you.
After inserting the registration number and £2 the machine gave me 2 choices, take ticket or add more money, I chose take ticket.
I now realise that I could have paid £4 and still would have got this parking charge as all tickets are in advance only.
How does that square with the sign instruction to pay “at the machine anytime before exiting the car park"
I was concerned that the ticket I paid for was for time in advance and not arrears, on returning home I made very strenuous efforts with the parking eye helpline to make sure I hadn't underpaid in any way.
I spoke to Angela on the operators helpline who advised me to sign up to Good2Go, which I did on that same day and which is verifiable, and that any payment owed would be taken within 3 days , therefore not to worry.
I signed up on Good2Go with my card details at 15.23 and the account was activated at 15.29 on the day of parking
I submit that I could not have done more on the day of parking to make sure I hadn't underpaid. I am still signed up with good2Go from that day with my card details on there.
I submit that there was no intention not to pay what was owed, in fact quite the opposite and that the signage was worded ambiguously to say the least or indeed misleading.

[Advertisement]

[nosferatu1001]

Irrelevant.

Summary is just a , well, summary. Nothing more.

[SchoolRunMum]

Operator Name Parking Eye Ltd
Operator Case Summary
The operator didn't provide a case summary

They never do, and they do not have to complete that bit. Means nothing.

[jonnybg]

When I got the email from POPLA asking for my comments on the PE evidence I went straight to the POPLA site and there was no evidence there.
I replied to their email immediately saying so.

Not much later the PE evidence was available there and i submitted my comments.

I just received a reply to that email with the PE evidence attached :-)

Not one sign they show as evidence mentions to pay before leaving your car


only one sign mentions when to pay and it is "any time before exiting the car park"

They've given me 7 days to upload comments that were uploaded on 7th

[nosferatu1001]

Second person with missing PE evidence today

State that the sigh was complied with. Even if PE argue another interpretation IS possible, which you deny, the consumer rights act requires that the most favourable interpretation is used. Popla cannot decide other than the interpretation that fits the consumers actions in the day must be used. That PEs machines were incapable of functioning correctly under this situation is not the fault of the consumer.

[jonnybg]

Thank you for that. If it does go to court that is very helpful.

PE site still saying cancelled, no decision from POPLA yet

[jonnybg]

RESULT!

Thank you for submitting your parking charge Appeal to POPLA.
An Appeal has been opened with the reference xxxxxxxxxx
Parking Eye Ltd have told us they do not wish to contest the Appeal. This means that your Appeal is successful and you do not need to pay the parking charge.
Yours sincerely
POPLA Team

This is of course after PE themselves refused my original appeal.
My PE appeal did NOT include the misleading sign information/mitigation
It was the PE Operator Information and Evidence that they uploaded to POPLA, that gave me the signage information to look at which led to my final comments about it being misleading :-)
All the other information in the appeal was duplicated in the POPLA appeal

So, as PE "didn't contest" is that based on the fact that they just didn't provide a summary?

Operator Case Summary: The operator didn't provide a case summary

And does it mean that POPLA did not actually adjudicate on anything and upheld the appeal by default?

I'd love to know which aspect/s of my PE appeal or POPLA appeal was wot did it!

Maybe i should write to PE and ask them why exactly they did not contest the appeal ? haha

Happy new year

[SchoolRunMum]

I don;t see how POPLA can conclude that PE didn't contest the appeal, when they provided an evidence pack.

The 'case summary' is not mandatory and isn't relevant either way. By contesting the appeal with an evidence pack, they 'contested' it, and POPLA should be reminded of that as PE has a fee to pay POPLA in a contested case.

[jonnybg]

I cant write to POPLA challenging their statement This means that your Appeal is successful and you do not need to pay the parking charge

That would be a step too far :-)

It may just be the wording. PE may have been contacted by POPLA advised of their shortcomings and not contested that. They may have had to pay that fee, we wouldnt know.

[SchoolRunMum]

PE may have been contacted by POPLA advised of their shortcomings and not contested that.

That is not possible, it;s not how POPLA work. Ever.

I wasn't asking you to contest the decision, but simply to email POPLA back and thank them but point out that the operator did contest the appeal with an evidence pack and you added comments, so you cannot believe that PE can have been allowed by POPLA to escape the POPLA fee by backing out on the stroke of midnight and pretending they suddenly 'do not contest' a contested appeal that they must fund, and you are simply replying for completeness and so POPLA do not miss out on funding from this scum firm.

[jonnybg]

I agree about wanting them to pay but surely there is a chance then that POPLA realise a mistake and start actually adjudicating on it because I've enlightened them that it WAS actually contested?

The POPLA decision is stated as being (as I read it) solely and directly related to PE not contesting, i.e "they do not wish to contest the Appeal. This means that your Appeal is successful"