PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Court Notice/Parking Eye
e_saunders
post Fri, 15 Nov 2013 - 16:25
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 10
Joined: 15 Nov 2013
Member No.: 66,729



Last week I received a court notice from Northampton County Court for parking in a car park run by ParkingEye and apparently I stayed over the time limit on 17th July 2013. They sent me various speculative invoices which I binned and I didn't take any notice of so can't remember how long i stayed over for although the car park has a 3 hour limit and there is no way I would have stayed there that long but can't prove it. The car park has ANPR and they did send me a pic of my car against times I overstayed but I binned it unfortunately however this was sent so later after the day I parked that I have no way of knowing the accuracy of the timings. I am not the registered keeper of the car, its my mum and the notice is in her name but I was driving. I was in Wickes looking at Bathrooms for at least an hour and also SportsWorld where we spent some time but nowhere near 3 hours. Would they be able to help me even if I didn't purchase anything on this specific day.

I have acknowledged the claim on MCOL and said I'd defend so have the 28 days but now need to put together a defence .

The reason I binned the letters from ParkingEye was because I have always been under the impression these are speculative invoices i.e. not from a local authority so they have only contract law to use but the contract was with me and the shopping park owners. Parking Eye don't own the car park they just run the ANPR.

Any help would be appriciated
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 22)
Advertisement
post Fri, 15 Nov 2013 - 16:25
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Idontrightlyknow
post Wed, 11 Dec 2013 - 00:10
Post #21


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19
Joined: 27 Nov 2013
Member No.: 67,014



Well I like it
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
EDW
post Wed, 11 Dec 2013 - 01:30
Post #22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5,071
Joined: 1 Apr 2012
From: Arguing with Chan
Member No.: 54,036



QUOTE (e_saunders @ Tue, 10 Dec 2013 - 22:31) *
So here's an update....I sent off photocopies of a receipt and copy of a quote obtained from Wickes that day, PE allowed me 14 days to send these off and I did so within 5-7 days. This 14 day period hasn't actually elapsed yet but in that period PE sent a letter that I received yesterday titled without prejudice save as to costs to pay £50 also claiming that I can't now use POPLA nor will they listen to my appeal as its gone past their deadline. They gave me a breakdown of costs:

£15 for CC proceedings, £2.50 DVLA request, £2.50 postage, Admin costs £30

Not yet received or heard anything from my local court so probably not been transferred to them yet or PE are waiting for a reply from me...? Anyway my response to their without prejudice £50 offer is below and would appreciate some guidance before i post it in the morning:


I writing in relation to your second letter to me dated 6th December 2013 where you have requested £50.00 from me.

I am confused as to why you have sent this to me as I have fully complied with your request of providing further evidence of my custom as per your letter dated 28th November 2013. You promised that in consideration of receiving further evidence of my custom you would discontinue the county court claim.

You have received an email statement from the Customer Services Manager at the Borehamwood branch of Wickes stating I was a customer, I have provided you with a copy of my receipt and also a copy of a quote obtained at the same store. I was a genuine customer on 17th July 2013 and you have no lawful excuse to pursue this wholly unfair and disproportionate charge when I believe your contract with the shopping park specifically allows paying customers to be exempt. You are aware that you are required to show POPLA your full contract with Borehamwood Retail Park and if there is a 'genuine customer exemption' you would need to explain to them why this term is not mentioned in your signage nor in the Notice to Keeper, which I contend should be an imperative term to share with customers therefore I would be happy for you to explain this in court now that you are refusing to send me a POPLA code.

You have failed to show me any evidence that the cameras in this car park comply with the requirements of the BPA Code of Practice part21 (ANPR). POPLA would be best placed in their role to decide if you have shown documented evidence of contemporaneous manual checks of the cameras, clocks and related machinery in that particular car park. These maintenance checks are a requirement of section 21 of the Code. Now that you are refusing to allow POPLA to carry out an independent review, please be ready to defend this in court.

You have also not provided me with any evidence showing that you are lawfully entitled to demand money from the driver or keeper. Parking Eye does not own nor have any proprietary or agency rights or assignment of title or share of the land in question. I do not believe that Parking Eye has the necessary legal capacity to enter into a contract with a driver of a vehicle parking in the car park they do not own, or indeed the lawful status to allege a breach of contract in their name.

I have asked you previously in my letter dated 25th November 2013 that you must provide documentary evidence in the form of a copy of the actual site agreement/contract with the landowner (not just a signed slip of paper saying it exists). Specifically, to comply with the Code of Practice, the contract needs to specifically grant Parking Eye the right to pursue parking charges in the courts in their own name, as creditor.

Familiarise yourselves with the judgement in VCS vs Ibbottson, which made clear that it was an extremely serious matter to knowingly bring court claims purporting to be under the authority of the landowner where no such authority exists. I am extremely confident that should you unwisely elect to proceed with this case when you have been given clear instructions to the contrary from Wickes and confirmation from them that you had no authority to do so in the first instance, that the court will recognise this as a gross contempt and deal with you and your lawyers accordingly.


To conclude, you will not be getting £50 from me but I will of course seek an order for costs in relation to any attendance at a hearing should you elect to follow this route - these will not be insignificant, by comparison the sums involved in your speculative attempt to extort money from me.





Looks fine, email it rather than waste money on a stamp.

https://www.parkingeye.co.uk/Appeal

This post has been edited by EDW: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 - 01:30
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Driver22
post Sat, 2 Aug 2014 - 00:36
Post #23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 203
Joined: 28 Jun 2007
Member No.: 12,616



How did this turn out?
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: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 08:51
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