PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Parking Eye, Split from hijacked thread
cimbom123
post Thu, 1 Jul 2010 - 14:58
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 1 Jul 2010
Member No.: 38,654



Hi

I also got a ticket from the same place last week and having read this post am interested in if you have continued to ignore letters from Parking Eye or have paid the penalty charge.

I was 30 minutes over from the 2 hours free stay limit. The worst thing is I'm not sure if I have another one on the way! This is only because I didn't realise the time and also was not aware of the cameras at the entrance and exit.

Also I was taking my mum to the shops there whom has a blue badge. Are blue badge holders still liable for these charges?

Your help is very much appreciated and thank you in advance.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Thu, 1 Jul 2010 - 14:58
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
southpaw82
post Thu, 1 Jul 2010 - 15:01
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,367
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



1. Don't hijack other threads.

2. The thread you hijacked was over three months old so I don't know why you were expecting a response.


--------------------


Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ManxRed
post Thu, 1 Jul 2010 - 15:03
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,385
Joined: 20 Aug 2008
Member No.: 21,992



QUOTE (cimbom123 @ Thu, 1 Jul 2010 - 15:58) *
Also I was taking my mum to the shops there whom has a blue badge. Are blue badge holders still liable for these charges?


No one is liable for these charges.

Do not pay, do not contact the parking company. File it all away in a drawer and ignore it.

Read the sticky thread about PPCs and the Watchdog one as well.


--------------------
Sometimes I use big words I don't understand in an effort to make myself sound more photosynthesis.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cimbom123
post Thu, 1 Jul 2010 - 15:23
Post #4


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 1 Jul 2010
Member No.: 38,654



Sorry, did not mean to hijack thread I was just interested to see if the person who posted it has chosen to ignore or pay, seen as I got one in the same place.

Its my first time using this forum so need getting used to.

What about the photographic evidence that they have, surely this can be used as evidence? The cameras are well appointed at the entrance and exit.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
orford
post Thu, 1 Jul 2010 - 15:33
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,069
Joined: 13 Nov 2008
Member No.: 24,050



QUOTE (cimbom123 @ Thu, 1 Jul 2010 - 16:23) *
What about the photographic evidence that they have, surely this can be used as evidence? The cameras are well appointed at the entrance and exit.
They have a photo of a car. They can't sue an inanimnate object only a person, who they cannot identify
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bama
post Thu, 1 Jul 2010 - 15:34
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,906
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323



No. Unattested photographs prove diddly squat.

if you disagree then just
name these people and tell me their addresses
http://www.123rf.com/photo_6338406_busines...other-side.html


--------------------
Which facts in any situation or problem are “essential” and what makes them “essential”? If the “essential” facts are said to depend on the principles involved, then the whole business, all too obviously, goes right around in a circle. In the light of one principle or set of principles, one bunch of facts will be the “essential” ones; in the light of another principle or set of principles, a different bunch of facts will be “essential.” In order to settle on the right facts you first have to pick your principles, although the whole point of finding the facts was to indicate which principles apply.

Note that I am not legally qualified and any and all statements made are "Reserved". Liability for application lies with the reader.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dave-o
post Thu, 1 Jul 2010 - 15:36
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12,824
Joined: 7 Jan 2008
From: London
Member No.: 16,454



QUOTE (cimbom123 @ Thu, 1 Jul 2010 - 16:23) *
Sorry, did not mean to hijack thread I was just interested to see if the person who posted it has chosen to ignore or pay, seen as I got one in the same place.



It doesn't matter what the other member did. The ticket is all hot air, designed to make you think it's legitimate.

Ignore it. Parking Eye are one of the more technology-based PPCs but they have never done anything more than send out a few letters and hope to fool a few mugs.

When dealing with "tickets" from private parking companies (PPCs) our advice is to ignore them. For more information about this recommendation and private parking companies, click this link.


Watchdog on PPCs:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAIcdi9niHA

This post has been edited by dave-o: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 - 15:36


--------------------
Dave-o 3-0 LB Waltham Forest.
Goalscorers: B. Alighting 08', G. Fettered 34', I. Markings 42'


Dave-o 2-0 LB Islington
Goalscorers: V. Locus 82', I. Dates, 87'
Dave-o 1-0 LB Redbridge
Goalscorer: I. Markings 79'


Dave-o 1-0 LB sCamden
Goalscorer: I. Dates, 86'

Dave-o 1-0 LB Hammersmith & Fulham
Goalscorer: T. Signage, 19'
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Thu, 1 Jul 2010 - 15:38
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,367
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (bama @ Thu, 1 Jul 2010 - 16:34) *
No. Unattested photographs prove diddly squat.

if you disagree then just
name these people and tell me their addresses
http://www.123rf.com/photo_6338406_busines...other-side.html

Put a defendant in a courtroom and show a photo of them doing something. Then tell me it proves diddly squat.


--------------------


Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cimbom123
post Thu, 1 Jul 2010 - 15:48
Post #9


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 1 Jul 2010
Member No.: 38,654



Whats the chances of Parking Eye taking me to court?

If there is a chance then I would like to avoid even getting to that stage.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Thu, 1 Jul 2010 - 15:50
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,367
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



I can't recall parking eye ever doing court but since anyone can take you to court and you don't want to do court... send me £1,000 by the end of the week or I'll take you to court.


--------------------


Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bama
post Thu, 1 Jul 2010 - 15:52
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,906
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Member No.: 4,323



identifying the defendant in the court room on the day. psshtt

and of course for a civil claim the defendant doesn't need to be there anyway..

and here's one to ponder
which one of these two different women is Linda Hamilton

http://www.eeggs.com/images/items/3350.full.jpg


--------------------
Which facts in any situation or problem are “essential” and what makes them “essential”? If the “essential” facts are said to depend on the principles involved, then the whole business, all too obviously, goes right around in a circle. In the light of one principle or set of principles, one bunch of facts will be the “essential” ones; in the light of another principle or set of principles, a different bunch of facts will be “essential.” In order to settle on the right facts you first have to pick your principles, although the whole point of finding the facts was to indicate which principles apply.

Note that I am not legally qualified and any and all statements made are "Reserved". Liability for application lies with the reader.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dave-o
post Thu, 1 Jul 2010 - 16:09
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12,824
Joined: 7 Jan 2008
From: London
Member No.: 16,454



QUOTE (cimbom123 @ Thu, 1 Jul 2010 - 16:48) *
Whats the chances of Parking Eye taking me to court?



None.

Southpaw is only playing devil's advocate.


--------------------
Dave-o 3-0 LB Waltham Forest.
Goalscorers: B. Alighting 08', G. Fettered 34', I. Markings 42'


Dave-o 2-0 LB Islington
Goalscorers: V. Locus 82', I. Dates, 87'
Dave-o 1-0 LB Redbridge
Goalscorer: I. Markings 79'


Dave-o 1-0 LB sCamden
Goalscorer: I. Dates, 86'

Dave-o 1-0 LB Hammersmith & Fulham
Goalscorer: T. Signage, 19'
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Thu, 1 Jul 2010 - 18:28
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,367
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



No, Southpaw was being facetious wink.gif


--------------------


Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SchoolRunMum
post Thu, 1 Jul 2010 - 18:32
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,672
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Member No.: 32,130



QUOTE (cimbom123 @ Thu, 1 Jul 2010 - 16:48) *
Whats the chances of Parking Eye taking me to court?

If there is a chance then I would like to avoid even getting to that stage.





Stop taking the piece of paper so seriously! You really must ignore it.

Watchdog covered this last month, and their legal bod helpfully confirmed just what we tell everyone to do with private parking tickets (even if you have 'contravened their rules' and even if they have a pretty picture of your car):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAIcdi9niHA



The registered keeper will receive a few debt collector letters telling you to pay. Do not panic, do not believe the claims about Court/CCJs/dire consequences! See example pictograms and scans of the letters on MSE here of what you will receive. Parking Eye letters are shown in detail on there:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/....php?t=2214803

Ignore ALL the letters in the absence of Court Papers (which will never come because that's not how these companies work). If they tok you to Court they'd lose if you turned up and defended it. That's won't happen though.

If the daft letters get tiresome you may like to also report the company and their debt collectors for harassment:

http://www.nationaldebtline.co.uk/en...=03_harassment

But don't forget this is NOT a debt, NOT a fine, just a mickey mouse ticket, a piece of bog roll.

Nothing happens, your credit record is NOT affected, so don't fall for it. Tell your friends never to pay a private parking ticket; spread the word.

This post has been edited by SchoolRunMum: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 - 18:36
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cimbom123
post Tue, 6 Jul 2010 - 15:04
Post #15


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 1 Jul 2010
Member No.: 38,654



I know I am probably worrying about nothing but what is the difference between private parking fines and council parking fines?

At the end of the day, they both take pictures of the cars and yet i hear councils can take you to court and private companies don't but some do! Is this true?

How much would it cost a private company to take me to court? Is there any cases out there where people have been taken to court?

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Gan
post Tue, 6 Jul 2010 - 15:28
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,678
Joined: 23 Mar 2009
Member No.: 27,239



Councils are backed by legislation.

There is nothing in British law that allows private companies to sue for anything more than their loss.
For 30 minutes parking you didn't pay for, that is how much ?

Very few of these ever get near a court. Even if papers are issued the PPC will run at the first sign of a defence. If you check the threads you will see that on the rare occasions that a case does come before a judge (Excel, OPC or Minster usually) they lose.
When this happens another lot of drivers know not to pay. That's why a PPC won't risk it.

On the only occasion that the PPC won it was because the driver told blatant lies and annoyed the judge.

Parking Eye are even less likely than most to go to court because quite often they don't even run the car park.

The Chairman of the British Parking Association, the PPC trade organisation, gave evidence to Parliament that private tickets have no legal status. What more advice do you need ?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cimbom123
post Tue, 6 Jul 2010 - 15:35
Post #17


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 1 Jul 2010
Member No.: 38,654



This is the first time this has happened to me so just trying to do my research!

QUOTE
On the only occasion that the PPC won it was because the driver told blatant lies and annoyed the judge.
QUOTE


So this driver was taken to court, can you tell me where I can read this article?

If I get taken to court, do I need to attend? If I don't attend will that turn against me?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SchoolRunMum
post Tue, 6 Jul 2010 - 16:35
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,672
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Member No.: 32,130



It will NOT go to Court because like most PPCs, Parking Eye don't 'do' Court. They know they'd almost certainly lose.

Did you watch the Watchdog excerpt I attached above, and did you look ahead at the letters you will be sent (on the moneysavingexpert link)? That's all you need to know:

1. from the Watchdog programme, that these tickets are paper-aeroplane material and

2. from the scanned letters on the MSE thread, a preview of what letters you will get (so you don't panic).

You WILL NOT be taken to Court. In those very, very rare cases when a PPC has tried Court (not Parking Eye because they don't, it's not part of their modus operandi) the PPC has lost where the person has shown up. THe defendant would have to show up, but it won;t come to that in your case.

The well-known exception is a set-up case where the motorist told lies about who was driving and the judge seemed to want to make an example of him. It's not worth reading as it wasn't a normal case.

Much more relevant is the Hetherington-Jakeman case, read this:

http://www.tpuc.org/node/231

HTH, please treat the ticket and the letters that follow, with the disdain they deserve. It's similar to receiving a series of phishing emails and you wouldn't worry about them would you?

This post has been edited by SchoolRunMum: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 - 16:45
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
orford
post Tue, 6 Jul 2010 - 16:36
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,069
Joined: 13 Nov 2008
Member No.: 24,050



QUOTE (cimbom123 @ Tue, 6 Jul 2010 - 16:35) *
So this driver was taken to court, can you tell me where I can read this article?

Combined Parking Solutions v Stephen Thomas

If I get taken to court, do I need to attend?
If I don't attend will that turn against me?
Yes and yes, but it won't happen. Parking Eye have never issued acourt claim. Their business plan does not include wasting money losing court cases
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Gan
post Tue, 6 Jul 2010 - 16:46
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,678
Joined: 23 Mar 2009
Member No.: 27,239



QUOTE (cimbom123 @ Tue, 6 Jul 2010 - 16:35) *
This is the first time this has happened to me so just trying to do my research!

QUOTE
On the only occasion that the PPC won it was because the driver told blatant lies and annoyed the judge.
QUOTE


So this driver was taken to court, can you tell me where I can read this article?

If I get taken to court, do I need to attend? If I don't attend will that turn against me?


Instead of trying to find the isolated couple of cases where a PPC did have a lucky win, you would be much better off putting phrases like "Excel spanked", "Minster Baywatch","OPC" and "watchdog paper plane" into the search box in top right corner of the pages.

Then take a look at all the typical letter chains.

PPCs make enough money out the mugs that take them seriously and panic after a few letters. They don't bother throwing time and money at the few who know basic law.

It's always best to attend a case because it prevents a PPC win by default. It's very informal anyway, solicitors are discouraged and Parking Eye have no more experience of it than you have.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
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: Wednesday, 27th March 2019 - 01:31
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.