PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Parking Eye taking to court - named driver - ignored the rest - any advice please?
GreenEyes
post Fri, 18 May 2018 - 21:05
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 408
Joined: 23 May 2009
Member No.: 28,952



<p>
Hi all,

I have received some very usefull advice on this forum in the past and had my fair share of penaltty appeals. Never private. Fortunately, the amount of PCNs that husband was bringing home reduced significantly enough for me not to come to this forum for a number of years. I am embarassed to admit that only now I have read that you no longer meant to ignore private penalties.

Well, I really didnt know, and we have done. Now we have court claim from Parking Eye. Asked husband for any previous correspondence relating to this but he has thrown everything away.

Husband works as a courier and has 2 other couriers workin for him. On the day in question, it was one of his couriers driving the van. After receiving original penalty&nbsp;I have written (via standard letter and cannot locate proof of postage now) to Parking Eye advising drivers name and address. Thats as much as I knew that we needed to do in such situation. Driver has now gone back to his country.

I dont recall hearing anything back from them, but can be wrong in case hubby got rid of some letters. I was stupidly telling him that it is still safe to ignore private ones.

I was going to defend this claim by sending in copy of my letter to Parking Eye and saying that they should be chasing driver not keeper. But now feel that much stronger defence would be needed.

There is so much information that I feel lost and I am not which be would be applicable in our case. I have submitted to court that we will be defending the claim but have to submit defence by next wednesday as we are going away on Thursday.

Could anyone please kindly point me into a direction that would be aplicable in our scenario? Namely -

1. named the driver, although no proof of that, apart from letter I have kept in my computer

2. Havnt kept any correspondence from parking Eye, so cannot rely on what could have been said there

What would be out strongest points? and are we likely to win?

Many thanks to everyone for any advice






http://i65.tinypic.com/1zfsnjm.jpg



This post has been edited by GreenEyes: Fri, 18 May 2018 - 21:32
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
3 Pages V   1 2 3 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Fri, 18 May 2018 - 21:05
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Macapaca
post Fri, 18 May 2018 - 21:19
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 647
Joined: 10 Oct 2017
Member No.: 94,458



You have named the driver so let them chase the driver! The fact he is now in another country is their problem.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GreenEyes
post Fri, 18 May 2018 - 21:22
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 408
Joined: 23 May 2009
Member No.: 28,952



Thank you, that was what I thought, but I have no proof I have sent them that letter and I still have to file defence. Would just saying 'chase the driver' and adding attaching letter in word document be sufficient?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Macapaca
post Fri, 18 May 2018 - 21:34
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 647
Joined: 10 Oct 2017
Member No.: 94,458



What other information do you have? Surely you received a full and compliant LBA containing all the details about the case and who is considered liable?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GreenEyes
post Fri, 18 May 2018 - 21:47
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 408
Joined: 23 May 2009
Member No.: 28,952



i am afraid nothing.. husband checked everywhere and says he must have binned it since I always told him that private penalties can be ignored (I didnt say to throw it all away though!!) - so we have absolutely nothing apart from this court claim form
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Sat, 19 May 2018 - 06:47
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56,196
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



For future reference Private tickets shouldn’t have been ignored since 2013.

Write to them straight away requiring a copy of all documentation they hold so that both parties understand the others position in accordance with the pre-action protocols.

When they continued to write to him he should have challenged that, failing to do so may be considered unreasonable by the court.

Acknowledge the service using the online system, don’t contest jurisdiction and leave the defence box totally blank (but tick defend in full) you then have 33 dates from date of issue to prepare and submit the defence. Sending a copy of the letter to PE is not defending the claim, it has to be entered online, and you may as well add the other defence points available in case the judge decides the driver hasn’t been named.


--------------------
There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!

S172's
Rookies 1-0 Kent

Council PCN's
Rookies 1-0 Warwick
Rookies 1-0 Birmingham

PPC PCN's
Rookies 10-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Macapaca
post Sat, 19 May 2018 - 08:02
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 647
Joined: 10 Oct 2017
Member No.: 94,458



When you write to PE I would remind them of who the driver was and give his last known address at the time of the parking incident. Also point out that as the driver has been named the RK is not liable. Therefore request that they terminate the claim against you. It may be that they have tried to chase the driver and failed because he is no longer in country.

However, you must still proceed with your court defence as it appears to be in your name.You must NOT ignore any more letters.

As you have no information at all at this point then your only defence would appear to be that you were not the driver so not liable. If and when you receive something from PE then come back to the forum for some advice. There are lots of experts on here who can help but they need some information!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Sat, 19 May 2018 - 08:31
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 41,503
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: Planet Earth
Member No.: 49,223



QUOTE (Macapaca @ Sat, 19 May 2018 - 09:02) *
It may be that they have tried to chase the driver and failed because he is no longer in country.

They do say this on their letters - it's largely untested in court though. IMHO once the driver is named with a serviceable address then the keeper liability ends. (As long as prior to proceedings)

In some ways I think a single point defence is workable. Challenging the amount is likely to be pointless but there may be a question over their authority but no guarantees.

So, as above, they have the wrong defendant. Even if the named driver did not respond then that's where the claim should be sent, even if it was a previous address and a default judgment was gained. (But of course, with a valid RK address it's far more likely to bring fruits)

(Default) Judgments are easy - actually collecting on them is often the hard part!

Personally, given the current stakes I'd take it all the way to a hearing if they won't relent.

This post has been edited by Jlc: Sat, 19 May 2018 - 08:32


--------------------
RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution
PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information, SAR=Subject Access Request

Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GreenEyes
post Sun, 20 May 2018 - 09:30
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 408
Joined: 23 May 2009
Member No.: 28,952



Thank you all, I have to submit defence by this Wednesday, as we are away from Thursday. Did I understand correctly that I have to write to PE requesting all the information they hold on this case and reminding them that I have already named the driver so they have no claim against us (which law can I quote please?)

PE only give their postal address so the reply will take time. Any chance anyone knows their email?

Should I also in parallel submit defence on the same point? that I have named the driver and so keeper liability has been transferred and the claim in not valid (and quote the law again). I am just worried if this one point would be enough or would it be seen by PE as an easy target?

I have checked thread on MSE but in our situation the advise is to start new topic, so I think since I already started one here there is no need? Or should I still do it over there too?

Many thanks to everyone for taking time to help out
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Macapaca
post Sun, 20 May 2018 - 10:06
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 647
Joined: 10 Oct 2017
Member No.: 94,458



I would write to PE AND submit the defence, as best you can, given the time pressures. Note that the driver is the person liable for the charge. POFA allows the PPC to chase the RK for payment in the case that the driver is not known or named. You have named the driver therefore your letter to PE should remind them that he is liable for the charge and therefore they should stop their claim on you with immediate effect. Assuming they received your earlier letter, which named the driver, they may have tried to contact the driver without success given that he is no longer in country. Therefore they are 'trying it on' with the RK in the hope that you are daft enough to pay up.

It is a pity that you do not have a copy of your letter which named the driver. However, PE don't know that! Would they really risk wasting money on a court case knowing that they will probably lose? I think not as the PPCs do not like wasting money. No, they are chancing that you will pay up.

Don't waste your time on email. Send a letter; keep a copy this time and get a receipt of postage from the PO (and keep that as well!).

Send a letter to PE in the next day or so. You have time to write a simple but effective letter before you go on holiday.

As to whether you start another thread on MSE, that is your call. It is always good to get a broad view but in you limited time you might complicate things.

This post has been edited by Macapaca: Sun, 20 May 2018 - 10:25
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GreenEyes
post Sun, 20 May 2018 - 10:49
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 408
Joined: 23 May 2009
Member No.: 28,952



Thank you very much, Macapaca, will draft the letter to PE today and the defence and will post it on here

(I do have the copy of the letter I have sent to PE on my PC - word doc)

This post has been edited by GreenEyes: Sun, 20 May 2018 - 10:59
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Sun, 20 May 2018 - 11:40
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,088
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



Does it give the name and the address of the driver? Some people just name the driver and think it is sufficient.

Did you get a response from PE when you identified the driver?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BillG
post Sun, 20 May 2018 - 12:17
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 53
Joined: 8 Jun 2011
Member No.: 47,328



My daughter got a ticket from Parking Eye last year when on a visit from abroad. PE sent its claim here but I replied saying she lives abroad and gave them her home address. Neither of us has heard a cheep since.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GreenEyes
post Sun, 20 May 2018 - 14:04
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 408
Joined: 23 May 2009
Member No.: 28,952



I have provided name and address of the driver when written initial letter to them.

Do you think below would be sufficient for PE and second bit for defence? Anything else I should be addind to improve my chances of PE not taking this further? Also am I able to attach anything when I file defence? Is there such option?




Thank you all for support

................

Dear ParkingEye,



I am writing with regards to Parking Charge No xxx/xxx



On the 23rd of October 2017 I have written to you in relation to this charge advising that I was not the driver of the vehicle in question at the time of the alleged contravention and have provided the name and address of the driver as is required by law.



As stated in my previous letter to you, the driver in control of the vehicle at the time of the alleged contravention was Name Surname of Address (the address at the time of the contravention).



Since the driver has been named, the liability for the charge is transferred to the driver and the registered keeper is no longer liable. Therefore, the wrong defendant is named on your county court claim and it should be terminated with immediate effect



Should you wish to continue pursuing registered keeper, despite the fact that liability has clearly been transferred to the driver, I request you to provide me with a copy of all documentation you hold relating to this charge so that both parties understand the others position in accordance with the pre-action protocols.



Kind regards



Defence:



1. Registered keeper is wrongly named as the defendant since Registered Keeper has provided name and address of the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged contravention to the ParkingEye Ltd. Copy of the letter sent to ParkingEye Ltd on 23/10/17 is attached. According to POFA regulation, once the name and address of the driver is provided, registered keeper is no longer liable, and it the driver who should be pursued for the charge.

2. I, Registered Keeper, have never seen the contract for which I am being held liable. Having checked information on ParkingEye website available for this charge, there are only two photographs available. Which merely show registration plate. The lighting is so bad that the rest of the vehicle is invisible / blacked out. The make and model of the vehicle is unidentifiable. This evidence is insufficient to constitute any breach of contact.

3. Given the quality of this evidence and therefore the lighting at the alleged place of contravention it is possible to presume that the alleged signage which is claimed to be displayed ‘clearly’ by the ParkingEye would not have been visible to user of the private land in question at the alleged date and time of contravention - 03/10/2017 20:18





This post has been edited by GreenEyes: Sun, 20 May 2018 - 14:23
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Macapaca
post Sun, 20 May 2018 - 14:43
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 647
Joined: 10 Oct 2017
Member No.: 94,458



Note that naming the driver is not required by law for a Parking Charge Notice so I would change that sentence. You elected to name the driver but you didn't have to. In your case it was just as well that you did!

You have misunderstood the situation re liability. The RK was never liable and so it is wrong to day that liability was transferred to the driver. The driver was always fully liable and still is. That is your main defence! I would change the relevant statements because it sounds like you are trying to pass the buck whereas the buck doesn't stop with you at all! That will give PE a bit of hope that you feel liable and might pay if they apply enough pressure. What you are trying to do here is tell PE quite clearly who is liable and then watch them go and chase thin air with them off your back!

I really don't think you need anything else. Your additional points might have relevance if you were defending as RK but you are not. It might sound like you are not too confident about naming the driver and need a backstop.

You are right to ask for PAP related documentation but I suggest that you give them a date to supply it otherwise you will consider that they do not wish to persue this PCN in accordance with the PAP. This puts you more in control. If needed, because of timing, you might also need to request to the court, and advise PE, that proceedings are formally put on hold until they have complied with the PAP as they are required to do to avoid wasting court time. You could also point out that a judge will consider it unreasonable behaviour if they do not comply with this.

This will call their bluff. If they are very serious about proceeding to court then they will have to respond in full otherwise they will be in a weak position. If they are not serious then they may just give up and go quiet.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GreenEyes
post Sun, 20 May 2018 - 15:21
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 408
Joined: 23 May 2009
Member No.: 28,952



Thanks Macapaca, I agree with you on extra points, it just feels strange to make defence on 1 point. Would I be able to bring those extra points in at a later stage if PE go ahead with the claim?

Please see edited defence and letter to PE:



Dear ParkingEye,


RE: Parking charge no XXX

I am the registered keeper of the vehicle registration number XXX.

On the 23rd of October 2017 I have written to you in relation to this charge advising that I was not the driver of the vehicle in question at the time of the alleged contravention and have provided the name and address of the driver.

As stated in my previous letter to you, the driver in control of the vehicle at the time of the alleged contravention was NAME of Address(the address at the time of the contravention).

The driver is fully liable for the charge. As POFA 5 (1) (b) no longer applies there can therefore be no keeper liability. Your county court claim wrongly specifies registered keeper as defendant and should be terminated with immediate effect.

Should you wish to continue wrongly pursuing registered keeper, I request you to provide me with a copy of all documentation you hold relating to this charge so that both parties understand the others position in accordance with the pre-action protocols. Please supply requested information by the 29th of May 2018 otherwise I will consider that you do not wish to pursue this PCN in accordance with the pre-action protocols. I will be requesting court that proceedings are formally put on hold until ParkingEye have complied with the pre-action protocols as is required to do so to avoid wasting court’s time. Failure to comply with pre-action protocols will be considered unreasonable behaviour by judge.

Kind regards



Defence:

1. I am the registered keeper of the vehicle registration number XXX
2. Registered keeper is wrongly named as the defendant since Registered Keeper has provided name and address of the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged contravention to the ParkingEye Ltd. Copy of the letter sent to ParkingEye Ltd on 23/10/17 is attached. As POFA 5 (1) (b) no longer applies there can therefore be no keeper liability and it the driver who should be pursued for the charge


3. Parking Eye are requested to provide me with a copy of all documentation they hold relating to this charge so that both parties understand the others position in accordance with the pre-action protocols.

4. I would like to request court that proceedings are formally put on hold until ParkingEye have complied with the pre-action protocols as is required to do so to avoid wasting court’s time. Failure to comply with pre-action protocols would constitute an unreasonable behaviour.







This post has been edited by GreenEyes: Sun, 20 May 2018 - 16:52
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Sun, 20 May 2018 - 16:28
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,088
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



You must clearly state that you are the registered keeper.

The supply of the driver identity is NOT required by law, on the contrary. You provided the identity, as requested, to remove any liability from the keeper.

The keeper is no longer liable as POFA 5 (1) (b) no longer applies and there can therefore be no keeper liability.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GreenEyes
post Sun, 20 May 2018 - 16:53
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 408
Joined: 23 May 2009
Member No.: 28,952



thank you ostell, I have edited my post above (required by law was meant to be edited earlier, now gone)

This post has been edited by GreenEyes: Sun, 20 May 2018 - 16:54
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Macapaca
post Sun, 20 May 2018 - 17:43
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 647
Joined: 10 Oct 2017
Member No.: 94,458



Looks good. If you get a stay of proceedings then you will presumably be able to offer further evidence as part of your full defence later, if needed. Hopefully somebody will comment if this is not correct.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Umkomaas
post Sun, 20 May 2018 - 18:04
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,124
Joined: 8 Feb 2013
Member No.: 59,842



QUOTE
Kind regards

Are you serious?

'Kind regards' to someone suing you and looking to grab a couple of hundred quid of your money? "Kind regards'? - anything but!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V   1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 13:19
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here