Parkingeye cockhedge

katyjane80 · 26 June 2017 at 7:27PM

Hi there

Just a quick update

I have received 53 pages of counter appeal info from ParkingEye via POPLA today and now I'm being asked to comment, its mostly pictures of the signage, the correspondence which has already been sent to me and the pics of my car entering and leaving the car park.
They have also included a log of parking meter transactions from that date to prove the machines were working.
Has anyone got any suggestions with what to comment back with. I have 7 days???

Thanks

Redx · 26 June 2017 at 7:48PM

search the forum for rebuttals to these types of evidence issued by PE to popla , plagiarise whatever they said

look for faults, errors and inaccuracies in what they have said , then rebut anything you can find

it doesnt need to be war and peace, simply show the error of their ways , like contract dates that have expired etc

Coupon-mad · 28 June 2017 at 1:17AM

katyjane80 wrote: »

I have received 53 pages of counter appeal info from ParkingEye via POPLA today

Normal for PE, mostly template stuff.

Look closely at the signage photos, the dates on those, and the contract from the landowner, and other evidence.

For example, if they've only supplied the log from ONE of the parking machines, and you know there is more than one, point that out to POPLA and question why there was not more than one log that day, seeing as there are x machines.

Comment about the signage pics, everything, in bullet points, not a whole re-statement of your appeal, or POPLA simply will not read it.

katyjane80 · 28 June 2017 at 7:08PM

Hi all thanks for replies, here's my comments to respond, do you think this would be enough:

In response to the evidence provided by ParkingEye I would like to offer the following comments:

The photographs which have been included in the evidence (section F) are generic photos of ParkingEye signs and the majority of the photographs are dated 2015 and are not relevant in any way to the parking fine received in April 2017

In (Section G) evidence has been provided to show all tickets purchased on the date when the driver used the car park. It shows that a parking ticket was purchased at 08:56 and then no more parking tickets were issued until 12:21 and after which tickets were purchased on average every 7-10 minutes until approx 18:00. This suggests that there was a period of time between 08:56 and 12:21 where the parking machines were not working efficiently, the driver entered the car park that day at 12:16 and was unable to purchase a parking ticket.

A direct quote taken from George Wesson who is the signatory of the witness statement and manager of the retail park (Section G) states: “We have listened to customers and quickly introduced a new parking attendant to try and ensure that all our customers understand the rules". There was no parking attendant present on the day the driver was unable to use the parking meter.

That's all I've got up to now ?

Thanks

Coupon-mad · 29 June 2017 at 3:55PM

It shows that a parking ticket was purchased at 08:56 and then no more parking tickets were issued until 12:21 and after which tickets were purchased on average every 7-10 minutes until approx 18:00. This suggests that there was a period of time between 08:56 and 12:21 where the parking machines were not working efficiently, the driver entered the car park that day at 12:16 and was unable to purchase a parking ticket.

Brilliant - if POPLA read that you should win on that evidence.

And indeed, would appear to have grounds to sue PE for 3 figure compensation. More people should.

katyjane80 · 29 June 2017 at 6:00PM

Brill I have submitted my counter comments, I have switched it around so that the section about the log of parking tickets issued are the first point made, in an attempt to make sure they are read - fingers crossed

Thanks for all your advice

katyjane80 · 14 July 2017 at 5:28PM

Gutted. I got an unsuccessful decision today.....oh well it was worth a go

thanks for the support

Coupon-mad · 14 July 2017 at 9:18PM

Hey come on, a dodgy and bizarre POPLA decision is exactly that. We've seen them before.

Your evidence (and theirs) proved the machines were not working at the material time. You do not have to pay this, you know, a POPLA loss is neither here nor there and is wrong, in your case.

What did POPLA say, please copy it out and add paragraphs before posting (no wall of text).

katyjane80 · 16 July 2017 at 7:19PM

This is the point I thought I would have them on but no apparently not

The appellant comments that the report shows payments being made at 08:56 and then there is no payments made until 12:21 and therefore this demonstrates that the machine were not working between these times. While I note the appellant’s comments, the operator has confirmed that the report shows details of payments made between the entry and exit times of the appellant’s vehicle, which are 12:16 and 15:31 respectively. Therefore I am satisfied that the machines were working between these times.

There's a link on POPLA's website which will take me directly to the parkingeye payment site lol....I'm not going to do that, I will wait as long as i can before payming it as i have a holiday coming up and am a bit skint......is there any way this could affect my credit rating or would it have to get to court before then?

I was also thinking of emailing parkingeye to ask if i could pay in instalments what do you think?

Redx · 16 July 2017 at 7:24PM

to affect your credit rating it would have to

go to court
you lose
you dont pay the judgment within 28 days
a ccj is then enforced and trashes your credit rating

so pay up in full , promptly , if you lose

no idea about the latter

Parkingeye cockhedge

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free