ParkingEye PCN

josmos

Hi, I'm new to this forum. Yesterday my husband received a PCN from ParkingEye through the post stating that we must pay £85, reduced to £50 if paid within 28 days, for overstaying our stay by 2 hours in a local retail park. I did notice the signs saying only 2 hours stay, but as it was in the evening, we did not think that this still applied. Would you recommend that we pay, or just ignore. To be honest, I'm a little afraid of what they might do if we do not pay, as would not want anyone to come to my home, and take stuff from us. Please give me some advice. Thank you.

bazster

Just ignore them.

All that's going to happen is that they'll send you a series of increasingly hysterical begging letters, and then when you ignore them all they will crawl back under their stone.

Some of the letters will come from supposed debt collectors (the next desk in the same office). You will probably also get a letter from a fake solicitor (another desk along).

Ignore them all. They cannot come to your home and take stuff, that would be what is generally known as "burglary".

josmos

Just to add that the date of the said event was 22nd September 2012 but the PCN date of issue was 5th October 2012?

bazster

No matter, just ignore them.

Coupon-mad

Welcome to MSE!

The same advice applies to you as we give to anyone with a fake PCN.

Just play snap with each letter and be glad you dodged a scam. There are no bailiffs, they can't just send the boys round. It never ceases to amaze me that people actually think a firm can allege you owe them money and then just send the bully boys round, without a court win first...OF COURSE NOT!

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=24362

It's an old pepipoo thread but a good summary of the position. You are muddling up debt collectors with bailiffs. Also read the third from top thread, get ready to play a game of snap with the laughable debt collector letters, and also read and follow the advice and links in that third thread (PPC letter chains):

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/forumdisplay.php?f=163

A fake 'ticket' & letters from a PPC is much more like a phishing email scam than any 'PCN' and you wouldn't read a phishing email and believe it would you? Similar scam, impersonating authority and playing on some people's naivety.

But not you because you are here now and can spread the word now you know the truth. Tell your friends & family never to pay a fake PCN.

josmos

Could someone tell me though as the charge was for 22nd Sept but not issued until 5th October, what changes were made from 1st October? Sorry to sound ignorant

Coupon-mad

josmos wrote: »

Could someone tell me though as the charge was for 22nd Sept but not issued until 5th October, what changes were made from 1st October? Sorry to sound ignorant

Already covered in the forum, as linked above in my reply. Basically the tickets are no more enforceable than they ever were. IGNORE IT.

Really you just need to read a few threads after reading 'PPC letter chains' but your ticket was issued for an incident before the law changed anyway so it's under the old rules (not that it makes much difference to the usual ignore advice). Does not matter when the fake ticket was dated.

ManxRed

The only change that occurred on 1st October is that the parking company could pursue the registered keeper of the vehicle if they do not know or have not been told by the RK who the driver was.

That doesn't mean that their tickets are suddenly enforceable. They still would require landowner rights in order to form a contract with a driver anyway, and the charge must represent the actual losses incurred by the landowner. Which in a free car park is still zero.

So the ticket would be worthless anyway, and you'd be advised to ignore it regardless of which side of Oct 1st it fell on.

I am interested in their indication that the 'offence' (I use inverted commas because its not an offence, you haven't broken any law) occurred after Oct 1st and you state it happened in September.

IF they subsequently write to you and mention the Protection of Freedoms Act in their correspondence, then they could be in trouble with various authorities, and there's nothing we like more than dropping these chancers in it at any opportunity, so please come back and let us know.

RENEGADE_2

Put simply Josmos - the changes are technical and do not amend the validity of private parking company charge notices: they remain unlawful and none ever have to be paid.

You will receive two more letters from ParkingEye, one reminder and one final notice and then the case will self-destruct. They cannot legally have you because they will never prove to a court that your actions cost them what they claim - in civil matters, citizens do not have the right to penalise others and private parking companies, for all their chequered squares on their paperwork, are not authorities. The game is one scam. Ignore all the way.

Em67

ManxRed wrote: »

IF they subsequently write to you and mention the Protection of Freedoms Act in their correspondence, then they could be in trouble with various authorities, and there's nothing we like more than dropping these chancers in it at any opportunity, so please come back and let us know.

Sooooo...... I received a "Civil Parking Charge Notice" from Athena ANPR Ltd today. I was just about to pay but thought I should check them out online. Pretty glad I did as it turns out!

ManxRed - You asked if they are quoting the Protection of Freedoms Act in their letter and they have highlighted in red writing "You have the responsibility under section 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 of either paying this charge yourself or if you were not the driver advising us in writing within 28 days who the driver was at the time and their current address......."

I like the idea of dropping them in it even further but also a little bit of me is scared that I will be the one case they get through court.......

Cheers for all the advice on these forums.

taffy056

If you are a bit apprehensive now with it, its probably best to ignore them if you are the registered keeper of the vehicle, they will just continue to write their outlandish threats and disappear when they realise you aint falling for it.

To go the other route raises your head above the wall a little, you can appeal to them on a weak defence, then when its refused go to popla with a much better defence, and if you lose just ignore it as its not binding on you. If you win the case is dropped as this is binding on the PPC.

The problem comes if you lose, there is an increased chance they might chance the small claims, then you have a fight on your hands meaning that you have defend the case, and dedicate some time to get it right, also time to be at court to do so.

Its up to you which course you take, its your decision not ours.