Another Parking Eye question

markfj

Hi Guys

sorry, you probably get sick of these

My sister got a ParkingEye "fine" of £85 for overstaying in a car park, I told her to ignore it, as they cant legally enforce it (seen watchdog, here etc) she then showed me a piece of paper that came with it, stating the "Protection of freedoms act" which came in on the 1st october 2012 (the same day she parked there )

So can she still completely ignore the fine or is it a case of either playing or appealing (she cant really appeal i wouldnt have thought, she was over limit)

Thanks guys
Mark

Coupon-mad

Ooooh! Can we see that piece of paper please?! Haven't seen one of those yet and we'd love to report PPCs if they are explaining the effect of the Act wrongly!

If you can't post a link to a pic of it can you post a broken link please (remove the http /).

Basically the ticket is no more enforceable than it ever was. But now she has the choice of ignoring it or appealing it and then ignoring it (having cost PE £32+ as they have to fund the POPLA appeal!). The outcome is not binding upon the motorist but is binding on the PPC. Nice law.

RENEGADE_2

Bottom line, she will not have to pay, but for the price of a piece of paper and stamp and spots of printed ink, we can screw ParkingEye once and for all. It's time they got theirs.

markfj

Hopefully this will work

I cant understand though, if she was to appeal the ticket, what exactly would she be appealing it for, they're right in the sense she was 1.5 hours over the 3hr max stay

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v140/markfj/img007_zps42c2d888.jpg

andy13

Damn! I'm far from an expert but that explanation of POFA looks above board to me.
You can still just ignore them anyway

sennypijama

How about "you are required to pay or appeal the parking charge"?

You are not 'required' to do either.

andy13

Well, they wouldn't say you can ignore this, would they

taffy056

Oh dear that is wrong the registered keeper doesn't become liable for the charge, the bpa has explained this a number of times to the parking companies. This needs to be reported to the dvla

RENEGADE_2

markfj wrote: »

if she was to appeal the ticket, what exactly would she be appealing it for, they're right in the sense she was 1.5 hours over the 3hr max stay

Sorry if nobody has explained this to you yet so I'll try.

You may be confusing this issue with council issued penalties for offences on public land. In such a scenario, you wouln't have a genuine case to overturn one of their tickets because as you say, the vehicle overstayed beyond any reasonable window of tolerance.

The issue at hand is not whether the lady breached the terms of the signage - indeed this may be proven conclusively - but rather the demand of the landowner via the PPC. As a citizen, you have legal rights. You have the right not to be penalised by another private enterprise, you have the right to a hearing before your opponent's claim is declared a debt. Many acts ratify these basic principles, they go hand in hand with the fundemental code of Contract Law (the legislation here) which is that the landowner may only seek to recover losses: for example, to park for two hours without paying where the hourly rate is 50p means that the landowener is £1 out of pocket and so he can legally pursue this. Likewise, if the sign says "No Parking On The Yellow Lines" and you do this, his losses are ZERO.

Although we refer to the communication process as "appeal", it is imperetive that you avoid that word, otherwise you give the impression that you accede to their authority. You are actually denying the charge on account of it being a de facto penalty as it exceeds losses.

Given the antagonist knows this, you will receive an automated letter of rejection informing you that "your appeal wasn't successful" proving that they really do not peruse the representations.

You then convey the very same grievance to POPLA and this will cost the PPC £32, they will also be scrutinised. If POPLA overturn the illegal demand, Happy Days; if they don't, it won't matter because their decision is only binding for the PPC. You can from that point happily ignore everything, about half a dozen threatograms over five months and then the matter dies of old age. They won't sue because they know they'd lose. That's the other thing: you wouldn't stand before magistrates with a prosecutor cross-examining you as to why the demands were not paid; you'd be the defendant in a County Court whereby your antagonist, the defendant, will claim you owe him the ridiculous sum. When asked why? He'll say, "because they parked on my land and overstayed". Case dismissed.

The_Slithy_Tove

markfj wrote: »

Hopefully this will work

I cant understand though, if she was to appeal the ticket, what exactly would she be appealing it for, they're right in the sense she was 1.5 hours over the 3hr max stay

Frankly, it doesn't matter. The appeal will be rejected, certainly by PE in the first instance. But losing an appeal doesn't make the ticket any more enforceable.

Actually, you can say that the PCN is an unenforceable penalty as they can only recover their actual losses, which are zero.

markfj wrote: »

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v140/markfj/img007_zps42c2d888.jpg

Thanks. This is just an explanation, though. What it doesn't say is that the PCN itself, plus any further notices sent to the keeper, must follow a strict format if they want to use the POFA. I bet it doesn't. We'd need to see the actual notice sent (scrubbed of personal details - name, address, car reg etc).

BASFORDLAD

andy13 wrote: »

Well, they wouldn't say you can ignore this, would they

My fav option.