IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including QR codes, number plates and reference numbers.
ParkingEye Get the Chop in St Albans Court: No Standing
Options
Comments
-
A little birdy tells me that the Borehamwood Times, which delights in reporting on ParkingEye's and Jones LaSalle's behaviour at this site, has received a tip-off about this case.
The same little birdy tells me that the MPs for Hertsmere and St. Albans will also be receiving details of this case, with a query as to the appropriateness of the DVLA's actions in providing keeper details to a company which behaves in such a cavalier fashion.
I guess we'll also find out shortly whether Martin's new-found enthusiasm for "robustly defending our rights" extends to being allowed to describe ParkingEye as "cavalier".Je suis Charlie.0 -
Well done BP and PP. Seems the word is slowly breaking through and sooner or later the dam wall will be breached.
By bringing all these hopeless cases, what a disservice PE are giving their fellow PPCs who are merely trying to earn a crust. :T
I'm sure there's going to be a big backlash before too long!Please note, we are not a legal advice forum. I personally don't get involved in critiquing court case Defences/Witness Statements, so unable to help on that front. Please don't ask. .
I provide only my personal opinion, it is not a legal opinion, it is simply a personal one. I am not a lawyer.
Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.Private Parking Firms - Killing the High Street0 -
Another aspect of this case, highlighted by Parking Prankster, is yet more failures of PE's much vaunted ANPR system. According to the motorist, this was a clear case of double-dipping but PE are adamant that the system is foolproof . I would rather believe the motorist instead of PEWhat part of "A whop bop-a-lu a whop bam boo" don't you understand?0
-
A little birdy tells me that the Borehamwood Times, which delights in reporting on ParkingEye's and Jones LaSalle's behaviour at this site, has received a tip-off about this case.
The same little birdy tells me that the MPs for Hertsmere...
I would take both these comments with a huge dose of NaCl (all articles about PE mention "...fines...". I really can't see James "24 houses" Clappison getting involved in this.
But, does this ruling mean that anyone who's been "done" by PE in B'wood retail park (or whatever they're calling it this week) can appeal and claim back any money they've given PE?0 -
trisontana wrote: »Another aspect of this case, highlighted by Parking Prankster, is yet more failures of PE's much vaunted ANPR system. According to the motorist, this was a clear case of double-dipping but PE are adamant that the system is foolproof . I would rather believe the motorist instead of PE
Perhaps it is foolproof, but not idiot-proof?Dedicated to driving up standards in parking0 -
A little birdy tells me that the Borehamwood Times, which delights in reporting on ParkingEye's and Jones LaSalle's behaviour at this site, has received a tip-off about this case.
The same little birdy tells me that the MPs for Hertsmere and St. Albans will also be receiving details of this case, with a query as to the appropriateness of the DVLA's actions in providing keeper details to a company which behaves in such a cavalier fashion.
I guess we'll also find out shortly whether Martin's new-found enthusiasm for "robustly defending our rights" extends to being allowed to describe ParkingEye as "cavalier".
Be careful, Parking Eye might accuse you of a vendetta against them"The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis." - Dante Alighieri0 -
-
Can I ask - does the court system not have a procedure for getting rid of litigants I would almost call vexatious, like PE?
They must be wasting an awfully large amount of court time and the costs clearly aren't being covered.0 -
Civil Procedure Rules, Practice Direction to Pt.3 3CPD.2.1 according to Wiki - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vexatious_litigation#England_and_Wales
http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/vexatious-litigants0 -
Civil Procedure Rules, Practice Direction to Pt.3 3CPD.2.1 according to Wiki
OK thanks, that's interesting, although I was really asking more about the implementation. For instance, are there court judges who are starting to see the parking companies as a problem? How close to being vexatious are they? Is there another category for litigants who are not vexatious on each individual case, but systematically incompentent? Or do they get a free pass as the law is still being 'interpreted'?0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.5K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.9K Spending & Discounts
- 235.6K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.2K Life & Family
- 248.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards