Do i pay this?

esmerobbo

marlow wrote: »

it says will

Unusual maybe they are getting desperate. How ever seeing its Parking spy I would say it really means "WILL" not.

bromsgrovebarry

This is a standard letter that Parking Eye can purchase to give their charges the appearance of legitimacy. Several law firms sell a 'letter before action' for about a fiver a pop. Do not fret. It does not change the legal position and Parking Eye would not stand a chance in court. They know it as well.

esmerobbo

I wonder if the word "will" is in response to the normal advice here that points out the words "may" or "could" normally lets them off the hook when making threats of court action.

Using the word "will" without the intention of ever doing so could be seen as a step up in harassment. A plain attempt at intimidation.

Mustard_Dave

marlow wrote: »

last proper question i promise

im not sure who the land i parked on belongs too, its not possible that parking eye are working on behalf of the council is it? or if they were would the letter be from the council?

Councils do use private companies who can issue enforceable tickets. The easy way to check is the address - real ones will request payment to the fixed penalty clerk at the courts and fake ones will have the address of a private parking company. Fake ones tend to say 'Parking Charge Notice' and real ones say 'Penalty Charge Notice'.

bromsgrovebarry

Though Parking Eye still display notices in car parks threatening people with 'Penalty Charges'. This is unlawful.

bromsgrovebarry

A Harvey Ingram letter before action is only £2 + VAT so is a cheap way of putting the frighteners on you. Also Parking Eye's Automatic Number Plate Recognition system is pathetically unreliable and so so cannot provide conclusive evidence that you were parked for the time they say you were. There have been numerous instances recorded in the press about this outfit and their dodgy technology.

trisontana

bromsgrovebarry wrote: »

Also Parking Eye's Automatic Number Plate Recognition system is pathetically unreliable and so so cannot provide conclusive evidence that you were parked for the time they say you were. .

Also the CCTV does not show the identity of the driver. As yesterday's OPC case shows, unless the PPC can prove who the driver was, then they are scuppered.

bromsgrovebarry

Surely they are scuppered as well by charging unlawful penalties. However, your point about keeping quiet is sound advice.

marlow

i will ignore

in the unlikely event that it goes to court i will explain i wasn't the driver

esmerobbo

marlow wrote: »

i will ignore

in the unlikely event that it goes to court i will explain i wasn't the driver

Parking Spy, court, don't think you will need to ever explain anything.;)