Nanu
Mon, 3 Feb 2014 - 15:54
Click to view attachmentHaving complained to BPA re parking Eye not informing me of any result of my appeal made 5 November 2013, surprise surprise within 3 days of them contacting PE they have now informed me that they have rejected my appeal stating that it was rejected as I failed to supply sufficient evidence that I did not break the T&C's as stated on the signage. No explanation why not being able to park due to it being full was not sufficient evidence or dates when the appeal was held.
What was included was a 4 page list of "evidence" as to why their charges are commercially justified and a list of cases they say justify that view including many references to some on this site. (See attached)
I am putting the final touches to the POPLA appeal but am a little reluctant to post it hear as they clearly monitor the site.
Any thoughts or additional advice would be welcome at this stage prior to submission.
kirkbyinfurnesslad
Mon, 3 Feb 2014 - 15:56
just go ahead and post it, it doesnt matter who sees on here as makes no difference what so ever
ManxRed
Mon, 3 Feb 2014 - 16:06
Everyone ends up appealing on the same general issues, generic wording for which already exists on here in many places. PE have seen it loads of times, which is why they send you all that guff about their charges being commercially justified and so on.
No contract
Sum sought is not genuine pre-estimate of loss
Go on, post it up.
Dennis Basher
Mon, 3 Feb 2014 - 20:04
QUOTE (Nanu @ Mon, 3 Feb 2014 - 15:54)
Any thoughts or additional advice would be welcome at this stage prior to submission.
Based on the assumption that they sent this letter to you only very recently and in view of the spankings they have suffered in the courts over the last couple of months, Parking Eye have been very naughty in claiming in the Annex to the letter that “the below cases are not a full list of all Parking Eye’s court hearings, they are however every court hearing where the issue of genuine pre-estimate of loss has been raised since POPLA has been in place. As you can see no judge has ruled against Parking Eye on this matter”.
A genuine oversight or a deliberate effort to mislead and deceive? I’ll leave that for you to decide.
Perhaps it’s time that Parking Eye redrafted this Annex to include a more appropriate explanation that they are “pursuing a claim for their own profit as opposed to quantifying a breach and loss which this has caused them” (quote courtesy of Deputy District Judge Buckley)
justice2014
Mon, 3 Feb 2014 - 20:18
Makes no difference if posted here or not as POPLA will send ParkingEye all information that you send them. Same goes for ParkingEye. They need to send you all evidence submitted to POPLA before decision is made so you can decide to form additional defence arguments on what they submit.
A similar list and much longer list could be submitted on court cases lost by ParkingEye.
Gan
Mon, 3 Feb 2014 - 20:40
Do you mean that Parking Eye had previously rejected it but you hadn't received it OR that they rejected after three months and only when BPA contacted them ?
If the latter, ensure that you include in your appeal that ParkingEye clearly failed to observe the BPA code of practice in not serving the rejection within 35 days
matt285
Mon, 3 Feb 2014 - 21:15
don't worry too much about this, just post it up here and if anything is missing peeps will advise. then you can send it off and relax and get on with life
good luck!
bama
Tue, 4 Feb 2014 - 10:53
QUOTE
as I failed to supply sufficient evidence that I did not break the T&C's as stated on the signage
standard b/s i.e. pure chaff from PE
no one can prove a negative - and they know that.
SchoolRunMum
Tue, 4 Feb 2014 - 12:34
QUOTE (ManxRed @ Mon, 3 Feb 2014 - 16:06)
Everyone ends up appealing on the same general issues, generic wording for which already exists on here in many places. PE have seen it loads of times, which is why they send you all that guff about their charges being commercially justified and so on. No contract Sum sought is not genuine pre-estimate of loss Go on, post it up.
Yep, show us a draft like the ones shown in 'How to win at POPLA' in post #3 here:
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=4816822Everyone wins with the same words so no need to keep quiet (you could redact the code, refs, location & car reg from your draft shown here though!).
Nanu
Tue, 4 Feb 2014 - 19:51
QUOTE (Gan @ Mon, 3 Feb 2014 - 20:40)
Do you mean that Parking Eye had previously rejected it but you hadn't received it OR that they rejected after three months and only when BPA contacted them ?
If the latter, ensure that you include in your appeal that ParkingEye clearly failed to observe the BPA code of practice in not serving the rejection within 35 days
They only repliedonce contacted by BPA following my complaint to them.
Thanks I will include it
SchoolRunMum
Tue, 4 Feb 2014 - 23:31
Yep but remember that BPA CoP breaches don't win a POPLA appeal. The usual other stuff does, as per the link!
Nanu
Wed, 5 Feb 2014 - 21:17
Click to view attachmentOK Guys find attached the draft of my appeal.
Happy to take on board any suggestions to improve it so feel free.
Nanu
Sat, 15 Feb 2014 - 18:01
OK. Appeal submitted today with supporting documents
Any advice on how long theprocess takes now?
FieryPhil
Sun, 16 Feb 2014 - 02:49
Nanu, Please also make a complaint to DVLA, the BPA will never take any useful action over these outrageous breaches of their COP but at least DVLA are, to an extent, publicly accountable and with enough complaints will eventually have to act.
email addresses for complaints (send to both)...
foi@dvla.gsi.gov.uk
david.dunford@dvla.gsi.gov.uk
Nanu
Sun, 16 Feb 2014 - 18:37
Now copied my complaint to both.
Did just receive a response to my complaint from BPA and they stated that the 35 day limit torespond to an appeal is only a guideline so they did nothing against PE
Broadsword
Sun, 16 Feb 2014 - 19:12
Can you post the actual wording (verbatim) from the BPA Ltd about the 35 days only being a guideline please.
Nanu
Mon, 17 Feb 2014 - 19:52
As requested and please note that they stated that they received a further appeal which they definately did not.
Dear Sir/Madam
Approved Operator Scheme BPA Ref: 03861-L4J7J2
Thank you for your e-mail received concerning the parking incident and related correspondence with ParkingEye Ltd that you have sent to us. I can confirm that this organisation is a member of the BPA Approved Operator Scheme and as such is expected to adhere to our Code of Practice which you can review on our website – www.britishparking.co.uk.
If a member is found to be not compliant with the Code, they would be subject to our Sanctions Scheme where Operators can expect to receive a number of penalty points depending on the severity of the offence. As with driving offences, once an operator’s ‘licence’ has reached twelve points in any given 12-month period, then they are likely to be faced with suspension or expulsion.
This investigation has been concluded and I wanted to inform you of our findings.
ParkingEye Ltd have responded to my request for information regarding your complaint.
The parking operator has confirmed that they did respond to your appeal by letter dated 20 November in which they requested evidence to support your appeal. The operator they did receive a further appeal from you and then on the 29 January supplied you with a POPLA verification code as they rejected your appeal. As the appeal was on-going the 35 days is a recommendation to reach a decision by not a definite timescale.
Having looked at the Code in relation to this issue, I have to inform you that there is no material breach of the Code in our opinion.
Notwithstanding the fact that we can’t offer you any direct assistance in this matter, I trust that this letter offers you sufficient background to help you decide on your next course of action. Although we sympathise with your predicament we have no power to get an operator to cancel or refund any parking enforcement charges.
Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention and endeavouring to assist us in our efforts to drive up standards in the parking industry.
Yours sincerely
Approved Operator Scheme Team
Nanu
Wed, 19 Feb 2014 - 19:59
Please see the below text which I am sure you are aware of as it is the most recent version,
Complaint to BPA also copied to DVLA
Reference BPA Code of Practice Page 14 para 22.8
22.8 You must acknowledge or reply to the challenge within 14 days of receiving it. If at first you only acknowledge the challenge, or your reply does not fully resolve it, normally we would expect you to seek the additional information you require from the motorist and accept or reject the challenge in writing not more than 35
days after the information required to resolve it has been received from the motorist. It is acknowledged that in exceptional circumstances, an investigation into a challenge may take longer than 35 days after such information has been received and in these instances the motorist must be advised accordingly and given a date by which they can expect a resolution. If this date cannot be achieved then the motorist must be written to again and a revised resolution date agreed. We may require you to demonstrate that you are keeping to these times
Now, compare what happened in my case against this paragraph of the CoP - did PE fully comply, were there really 'exceptional circumstances' and did they adhere to the two 'must' requirements?
I think not. They only responded the day after you contacted them with my complaint.
Please investigate this matter further or I will be obliged to report the matter to the DVLA as the BPA have failed to properly and fairly investigate my complaint
Nanu
Mon, 10 Mar 2014 - 20:00
Have been notified of a appeal hearing date by POPLA at the end of this month. When do I get a copy of the PE papers that they submit?
Do they send them to POPLA then they are forwarded to me to comment on before the hearing date or do PE send a copy to me direct so I have time to rubbish them?
hoohoo
Mon, 10 Mar 2014 - 21:17
QUOTE (Nanu @ Mon, 10 Mar 2014 - 20:00)
Have been notified of a appeal hearing date by POPLA at the end of this month. When do I get a copy of the PE papers that they submit?
Do they send them to POPLA then they are forwarded to me to comment on before the hearing date or do PE send a copy to me direct so I have time to rubbish them?
POPLA signed a contract on 23 Dec 2013. Clause 9.1 states that operators have 28 days to supply evidence.
PE will email you the evidence if you appealed via the web, or post if you posted. POPLA forward your contact details to ParkingEye so POPLA can save money and get ParkingEye to do the legwork. For some reason POPLA do not consider this contravenes data protection laws, even though there is no good reason for ParkingEye to have your email address, telephone number and postal address other than administrative convenience.
If you have not received their evidence by day 28 phone POPLA to enquire, and also email POPLA so there is a record.
ParkingEye have given up on POPLA for the time being so this is likely to happen.
If ParkingEye submit anything to POPLA regarding GPEOL other than the usual bollocks they already sent you, come back here for more advice.
When you win, consider aiding other motorists by filing complaints to:
ICO as POPLA have provided unnecessary data to ParkingEye; namely any of your address/email/phone they do not already have.
BPA, DVLA and Trading standards as ParkingEye are trying to intimidate motorists by providing false information about their court record and implying they always win when they do not. See the parking pranksters website for examples.
Nanu
Wed, 12 Mar 2014 - 20:23
QUOTE (hoohoo @ Mon, 10 Mar 2014 - 21:17)
QUOTE (Nanu @ Mon, 10 Mar 2014 - 20:00)
Have been notified of a appeal hearing date by POPLA at the end of this month. When do I get a copy of the PE papers that they submit?
Do they send them to POPLA then they are forwarded to me to comment on before the hearing date or do PE send a copy to me direct so I have time to rubbish them?
POPLA signed a contract on 23 Dec 2013. Clause 9.1 states that operators have 28 days to supply evidence.
PE will email you the evidence if you appealed via the web, or post if you posted. POPLA forward your contact details to ParkingEye so POPLA can save money and get ParkingEye to do the legwork. For some reason POPLA do not consider this contravenes data protection laws, even though there is no good reason for ParkingEye to have your email address, telephone number and postal address other than administrative convenience.
If you have not received their evidence by day 28 phone POPLA to enquire, and also email POPLA so there is a record.
ParkingEye have given up on POPLA for the time being so this is likely to happen.
If ParkingEye submit anything to POPLA regarding GPEOL other than the usual bollocks they already sent you, come back here for more advice.
When you win, consider aiding other motorists by filing complaints to:
ICO as POPLA have provided unnecessary data to ParkingEye; namely any of your address/email/phone they do not already have.
BPA, DVLA and Trading standards as ParkingEye are trying to intimidate motorists by providing false information about their court record and implying they always win when they do not. See the parking pranksters website for examples.
Thanks. I was notified on 18 February 2014, of the appeal date so assuming PE was also, then they have till next Wednesday 19th to send me their stuff.
I very much hope they do as this is a fightback Forum and winning at POPLA is only the beginning. These parking companies have no idea whose car they are slapping a PCN onto. They will wish they had not issued me with a PCN. Trust me when I say that ICO and the BPA will be the least of their worries!
Nanu
Sat, 15 Mar 2014 - 19:33
At what point does the 28 days to provide their evidence start. 28 days from when POPLA receive my appeal or 28 days from when I was notified of a hearing date
hoohoo
Sat, 15 Mar 2014 - 22:02
QUOTE (Nanu @ Sat, 15 Mar 2014 - 19:33)
At what point does the 28 days to provide their evidence start. 28 days from when POPLA receive my appeal or 28 days from when I was notified of a hearing date
28 days from when POPLA notify them of the hearing date, which is the same as 28 days from when you are notified of a hearing date.
Nanu
Mon, 17 Mar 2014 - 20:17
QUOTE (hoohoo @ Sat, 15 Mar 2014 - 22:02)
QUOTE (Nanu @ Sat, 15 Mar 2014 - 19:33)
At what point does the 28 days to provide their evidence start. 28 days from when POPLA receive my appeal or 28 days from when I was notified of a hearing date
28 days from when POPLA notify them of the hearing date, which is the same as 28 days from when you are notified of a hearing date.
Thanks, I recieved a letter on 19th Feb dated 18th Feb so by my calculations they have one more day. Today I received a response from POPLA stating that as of today they have received no correspondence from PE and that has been noted in my case file. Very helpful POPLA I must say and very quick to respond to a query sent yesterday.
Nanu
Tue, 1 Apr 2014 - 18:54
POPLA appeal sucessful.
Yet again thanks to members of the forum for advice and guidence which resulted in PE not even bothering to challenge my appeal and offering no evidence. I have updated the completed cases forum but won't bother posting the actual findings from the adjudicator as they are the same as all the rest that has been won recently after following members advice.
Now the fightback begins with letters already drafted to the CEO of the Hospital trust where the PCN was issued complaining about their agents bullying patients and making illegal charges along with copies to the local MP and press. Also drafting a letter to HMRC re their claims in court that the high charges are justified as a result of running the parking and chasing those that don't pay. I have it on very good authority that these costs are already declared to HMRC as legitimate business costs in the profitand loss accounts which reduces their tax liability. Sorry PE you cannot have it both ways and I suspect those nice chaps at HMRC will be asking some very interesting questions of them in the near future and hopefully sending them a very large invoice for back tax. Will keep members updated as to progress
PS Also in the process of sending them an invoice for £96 for time spent defending my case charged at £18 per hour. I did warn them that this would happen if they continued with the case and will be following it up with court action if not paid. Hope I get to them before the tax man. I will of course be offering them 50% discount if paid within 14 days.
bama
Tue, 1 Apr 2014 - 19:27
Nanu,
I love you.
Jlc
Tue, 1 Apr 2014 - 19:27
You only need to offer 40% discount
SevenTowers
Tue, 1 Apr 2014 - 20:53
That's a brilliant result Nanu, keep us informed how you get on with your claim.
Well done!
Albert Ross
Tue, 1 Apr 2014 - 21:05
So are you invoicing the agent or the principal?
Oh and well done of course.
Nanu
Wed, 2 Apr 2014 - 10:12
QUOTE (bama @ Tue, 1 Apr 2014 - 20:27)
Nanu,
I love you.
Worrying!!!
QUOTE (Albert Ross @ Tue, 1 Apr 2014 - 22:05)
So are you invoicing the agent or the principal?
Oh and well done of course.
The invoice is being sent to PakinEye as they were warned that if the went after me and lost there would be costs. I warned them that I would charge £18 per hour as advised on this forum so they can't say they were not aware.
The discount offered will now be reduced to 40%
Salmosalaris
Wed, 2 Apr 2014 - 11:04
Well done and keep it up
I wouldn't offer them any discount
The water's also being tested as to whether there's a need to limit any costs to £18/hr as I don't think there is .
Jlc
Wed, 2 Apr 2014 - 11:12
QUOTE (Salmosalaris @ Wed, 2 Apr 2014 - 12:04)
I wouldn't offer them any discount
No need, but I'm sure the irony won't be lost on them.
Nanu
Thu, 3 Apr 2014 - 14:27
When looking on the Hospital Trust website where I was originally nabbed by PE looking for details of the CEO, I came across a feedback forum and a twitter account. I am not a member of twitter but did notice several people complaining of having had to pay PE for "illegal parking". Well I certainly took advantage of the forum and posted advice to all future readers on PE and parking charge notices with links to this website. That should reduce income at several sites accross the trust.
If you are captured at any site with a website or mentioned on Trip Advisor, may be worth giving some informative feedback for future readers
Nanu
Thu, 17 Apr 2014 - 19:08
Today I received a response to me sending ParkingEye an invoice. They say they are not responsible for any costs as I did not form a contract withthem so they are not liable. I am not even going to comment on the irony of that but just send them further correspondence again repeating my demand and wait for the 28 days to elapse.
Also posted details of the events and illegality of ParkingEye's activities to the CEO of the hospital Trust, the Trusts legal department and the local MP today giving them 14 days to respond before the local press get a copy also. Gave all the interesting links to various websites including this one and to recent court cases against PE andinvited him to reassess the parking contract.
Interesting times ahead I think
bama
Thu, 17 Apr 2014 - 20:36
QUOTE
They say they are not responsible for any costs as I did not form a contract with them
a breathtaking volte face from PE
and their usual err 'positional' confusion
matt285
Thu, 17 Apr 2014 - 21:10
QUOTE (bama @ Thu, 17 Apr 2014 - 21:36)
QUOTE
They say they are not responsible for any costs as I did not form a contract with them
a breathtaking volte face from PE
and their usual err 'positional' confusion
Funny enough, in this case they could be correct - depending on how the OP worded his "warning that there would be costs" - it could be seen as an offer to enter into a contract for the supply of services to be remunerated at standard / reasonable rate - or it could be seen as no such thing in which case the OP would not have any legal footing to claim their charges are due (just like ParkingEye don't).
Let us know how you're getting on with this claim.
bama
Thu, 17 Apr 2014 - 23:43
I refer you to the signs in PE car parks....
Nanu
Fri, 18 Apr 2014 - 18:56
QUOTE (matt285 @ Thu, 17 Apr 2014 - 22:10)
QUOTE (bama @ Thu, 17 Apr 2014 - 21:36)
QUOTE
They say they are not responsible for any costs as I did not form a contract with them
a breathtaking volte face from PE
and their usual err 'positional' confusion
Funny enough, in this case they could be correct - depending on how the OP worded his "warning that there would be costs" - it could be seen as an offer to enter into a contract for the supply of services to be remunerated at standard / reasonable rate - or it could be seen as no such thing in which case the OP would not have any legal footing to claim their charges are due (just like ParkingEye don't).
Let us know how you're getting on with this claim.
The warning was simple. I told them that I considered that their prosecution of the charge was vexacious and should not be continued quoting all the usual reasons. I warned them that should they persue the frivolous prosecution then a cost would be incurred as a result of the time I spent defending it at 18 per hour. I invited them to drop the case but they did not respond. They failed to challenge my appeal at POPLA and therefore lost and were told to recinded the charge
matt285
Tue, 22 Apr 2014 - 15:10
QUOTE (Nanu @ Fri, 18 Apr 2014 - 19:56)
The warning was simple. I told them that I considered that their prosecution of the charge was vexacious and should not be continued quoting all the usual reasons. I warned them that should they persue the frivolous prosecution then a cost would be incurred as a result of the time I spent defending it at 18 per hour. I invited them to drop the case but they did not respond. They failed to challenge my appeal at POPLA and therefore lost and were told to recinded the charge
This to me sounds like a reasonable offer to enter into a contract with ParkingEye for the delivery of services to be remunerated at £18 an hour.
Given they have replied in a matter which you could reasonably have taken as their agreement to proceed on this basis, I think you may have a valid claim.
Funny that they now reject your invoice. They could have told you earlier that they didn't agree to your terms - now is a little late.
Good luck and let us know how things go with this claim!
Nanu
Fri, 25 Apr 2014 - 19:26
Just got a reply from the CEO of the hospital trust who was very polite and has given me a direct contact number for a manager in their Facilities department who would like to discuss my concerns in person. The letter has also been passed to the legal team for consideration all of which sounds promising.
The letter also confirms in writing that the trust retain the control over income, parking charge notices and appeals arising from parking charge notices issued by PE. I think this confirms that PE have no legalstanding to persue these notices as far as any premises they control on behalf of Sunderland Hospital Trust which I hope helps anyone else who is captured at any of these premises. I will be making an appointment to speak with the Facilities Manager as invited.
Also a response from my local MP. They have the letter outlining all that has happend with all the various links and she is "concerned" and will be getting back with a response once she has researched the matter.
bama
Fri, 25 Apr 2014 - 21:26
better and better !
QUOTE
The letter also confirms in writing that the trust retain the control over income, parking charge notices and appeals arising from parking charge notices issued by PE.
You know who would love a copy of that letter (besides me).
good grief, could this be a 'two statuettes day'.
I never thought there would ever be a single statuette day, never mind a double !
Deep joy. am off to have a drink
Salmosalaris
Fri, 25 Apr 2014 - 21:36
I'd like to see Mr Kirk argue that PE are the principal on this site .
Any chance of a copy of that letter ?
Nanu
Sun, 27 Apr 2014 - 18:38
I have read the letter again and cannot find any reasonwhy I cannot share this letter. Certainly no reference to "In confidence" so it should be OK.
Before I do can anyone give me an idiots guide to how I can redact some personal info from a PDF file?
rk001
Sun, 27 Apr 2014 - 18:43
click on the highlight icon, then left click and drag over the bit to redact. Right click over the highlighted text and click on properties and select the colour icon. Click on black (or colour of your choice) and then OK.
At least that's how it works on mine - hope it helps.
Nanu
Mon, 28 Apr 2014 - 18:34
Nope that doesn't work so I am presuming it must be protected. I will redact by hand and scan that copy and I will send you a copy via a PM.
PS Excuse my Ignorance but who is Mr Kirk?
bama
Mon, 28 Apr 2014 - 19:35
PE's fave brief.
Nanu
Wed, 30 Apr 2014 - 19:02
Sorted the scan and know how to attach documents to these messages but tried to attach it to a PM but it keeps asking for a URL???
SchoolRunMum
Sat, 3 May 2014 - 00:05
Have you sorted it?
bama
Sat, 3 May 2014 - 13:17
been dealt with.
nanu is doing excellent work - statuette level !
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.