Parking Eye PCN

srfergo

Hi

I've received a PCN from ParkingEye that is quoting the Protection of Freedoms Act.

I've read the various forums and threads and while the overriding consensus seems to be to just ignore it, there are quite a few people who say not to ignore it, but just to appeal to the company and then challenge it using POPLA.

What is the general view? Am right to just ignore it, or do I need to challenge using wording suggested in other threads?

Thanks all

Simon

nigelbb

The quoting of the PoFA is just another way that they try & dress up these fake invoices as somehow official. Just like they try & confuse the issue by referring to them as PCN so that you think it's an official Penalty Charge Notice rather than a Parking Charge Notice which is an invoice that they would like you to pay.

Take a look here https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/3164256
&
http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/faq/private-parking-penalties/

Personally I think it's better to challenge them rather than just ignoring them. By this I mean asking on what basis they are are charging & what right they have to charge for parking on that land etc. If you want to go that route you will likely get better advice over on http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showforum=60

Guys_Dad

If you have read the other threads as you have said, then you will have seen that there are three schools of thought.

The first is to ignore. But if you do that, you will get a succession of threat-o-grams which you ignore but do keep the paperwork in case you are the unlucky one this month that does actually get court papers.

The second is to appeal, go through POPLA which costs them money and you may win, if you construct a decent appeal and are prepared to do some legwork on signs etc. If you lose, you ignore the adjudication.

The third option is the "Perky-Way". This involves being a Massively Uninformed Gentleman (or MUG) and you pay up meekly. This route is the one advised by the PPC employees/directors who come on here in various guises and warn of the apocalypse and plague of frogs that will befall you if you fail to pay their scam invoice.

The information you need is all on this forum. You are no different from anyone else, so it's your call.

Make the right one for you.

srfergo

Ok, thanks both.

the sensible route appears to be to use advice on the other links and challenge.

Guys_Dad

srfergo wrote: »

Ok, thanks both.

the sensible route appears to be to use advice on the other links and challenge.

If you are going to appeal, first of all to the PPC then POPLA, you need to state a reason.

If it is "I didn't know" or "didn't see" or any other mitigation, don't bother.

Put up a few facts and we can advise better or, if you are confident after reading other threads, then that's fine.

kgw2511

I've received a PCN from these cowboys, even though I have a valid ticket for the time I was in the car park and it was displayed on the dashboard. The only evidence they are using to issue the parking charge are photos of my car entering and leaving the car park - which I am not disputing. I am really annoyed with the tactics employed by theses cowboys and want to make the process as difficult for them as possible. I've told them that I have a valid ticket and will produce it as evidence if they decide to take me to court. Grateful for any views on my proposed action.

nigelbb

You should start your own thread not hijack this one.You need to provide more details too. Why are they claiming you should pay their charge?

srfergo

Hi Guys Dad

The "ticket" was from a hotel near the M25. I was there to meet a recruitment consultant and was there for about 45 minutes.

I believe the hotel has a problem with people parking for the day and commuting in but I don't think its unreasonable to expect to be able to park for free if I'm in the hotel and using their services?

Coupon-mad

Well it's reasonable to park for free if that's what's offered by the Hotel. Is it a free car park then?

Read any other Parking Eye threads or indeed any other PPC threads about any company:

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

Pretty much every other thread spells out what needs to be included in a strong POPLA appeal and I can't keep typing it out ad infinitum. You could look at my previous posts today and find some info.

I say people should use POPLA, that's my strong view.

srfergo

the hotel website states a £4 per day parking charge, I have no idea on the sign-age within the hotel car park but I was there for around 45 minutes and I didn't pay for the drinks in the hotel to prove that I spent money there.

I know I need to email parkingeye in the first instance before I can take it to POPLA,

I found a discussion over at peploo (I'm not allowed to post links unfortunately) called "Parking Eye (yes, again) invoice, PE invoice for using a hotel car park" that had an outline email to send - it was very long winded

do you suggest using a similar wording for my appeal to Parkingeye?

thanks very much for any help

Coupon-mad

Here's my advice just given to someone else about using POPLA re a fake PCN:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4538545

You'll see that the link to pepipoo that I prefer is to Bikerjp's thread 'PPC 'ticket' ignore or respond' which is my first link I gave that poster. I recommend you read all of that thread as it's about Parking Eye anyway and has really useful input from Broadsword who knows his stuff.

TBH the appeal you send to Parking Eye themselves could also be a really bland & soft appeal, it doesn't matter too much at this stage if you don't want to send something you don't understand or feel comfortable with!

Strong challenge or soft appeal, you'll no doubt get a rejection template 'EYE01' letter from PE, then you can use POPLA with a much more strongly-worded challenge at that stage.

For example, you could just say 'I was a patron of the Hotel, bought drinks at the bar, when parking I saw no signs from you so entered absolutely no contract with your company and there was no loss or damages caused either'.

And if it suits you to do so, you could even include a full and final offer of, say a £5 postal order (not a cheque with your details on!). You could say that as a responsible citizen you've tried to find out more and have just checked the website of the Hotel and see that they mention a small amount to park. As such - even though the driver saw no signs and was oblivious to this because of a failing of their signage - you are enclosing a postal order for £5 in good faith, as a reasonable offer to resolve the matter 'in full and final settlement' without any admission of wrong-doing at all.


Or you could go strong with stuff like this sort of thing (or parts of it that you like!) which is based on a barrister's wording. You'll notice that it doesn't even say who was driving nor give any info to PE at all:



'' Re: Parking Charge Notice (ref number)

On (date) I was the registered keeper of vehicle registration number xxxxxxx. As the registered keeper of this vehicle I dispute and deny the charge for the reasons set out below:

No contract
There is/was categorically no contract between the driver and Parking Eye. The driver did not see any signs when the driver entered the car park and at that time therefore had no idea about any alleged contract or restrictions and would certainly not have agreed to pay your extortionate 'charge' under any circumstances. To allege any 'contract' now to a registered keeper, weeks after the event, is too little, too late. You have failed to properly inform the driver at the time - and you cannot now retrospectively rely on any inadequate/unclear/unlit signage that you now may say is on site.

In any case, the information on your unsolicited postal invoice explains that the parking charge has been issued regarding an allegation that is clearly not a 'contractually agreed sum' and is therefore for either 'breach of contract' or 'trespass'. As such this 'charge' can only be a genuine pre-estimate of liquidated damages and you need to show how this figure has been reached.

Please confirm that this is indeed the case because you have not stated the nature of your demand, nor demonstrated any loss, nor even made it clear if VAT is being charged. I will of course require all of this information in order to make an informed decision.

No breach and no trespass
If there was no contract, then at most the allegation can only be a civil trespass. This is neither admitted nor denied but if this was the nature of the allegation then the driver would be potentially be liable for damages owed to the party who has suffered a loss. Since no ‘damage’ occcurred in the car park and also given the fact that the car park was not completely full throughout the time when the driver parked, used the premises and then left, there was in fact no loss at all - and certainly not to a third party agent who neither own the land nor occupy it with assigned proprietary rights.

By setting up cameras to 'catch' cars arriving and leaving a remote end of the car park, you fail to show any cars parked, and as such you fail to show that any trespass occurred at all. And in relying on remote cameras and failing to have any delegated staff on site also means that your business model fails in your duty to mitigate any 'loss' by alerting drivers sufficiently (or at all) to any possible breach. I challenge you to show otherwise.

Punitive/unfair/unreasonable
Even if there was a contract (which is denied) I challenge the basis of this invoice and require a specific, non-template reply to my contention that it is:

a. Punitive
The charge you are attempting to impose is punitive and therefore void and unenforceable. The charge is arbitrary and profit-making for yourselves as a mere third party agent whose sole/main income is from 'Parking Charge Notices' (you must show otherwise if you contend this is not the case). And it is wholly disproportionate to any alleged 'breach of contract'. This would also apply to any administration fees or added costs (however described) for 'debt recovery' or 'further action' unless following a court order, so take note that any additional costs (except Court fees) cannot be added now that the matter is in dispute.

b. Unfair
The charge you are demanding is an unfair term under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. In particular, Schedule 2 of those Regulations gives an indicative (and non-exhaustive) list of terms which may be regarded as unfair and includes at Schedule 2(1)(e) "Terms which have the object or effect of requiring any consumer who fails to fulfil his obligation to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation." Furthermore, Regulation 5(1) states that: "A contractual term which has not been individually negotiated shall be regarded as unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer" and 5(2) states: "A term shall always be regarded as not having been individually negotiated where it has been drafted in advance and the consumer has therefore not been able to influence the substance of the term."

c. Unreasonable
The 'charge' is an unreasonable indemnity clause under section 4(1) of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977, which provides that: "A person cannot by reference to any contract term be made to indemnify another person (whether a party to the contract or not) in respect of liability that may be incurred by the other for negligence or breach of contract, except in so far as the contract term satisfies the requirement of reasonableness.”

As well as a response to the above points, I also require the following for POPLA and for any legal advice I choose to seek:
Please provide me with a copy of the contract and site agreement between your company and the landowner/occupier and explain any involvement (monetary or otherwise) of the landowner/occupier with your company, as well as specifically with your Parking Charge Notices.

Please provide me with the photographs and all other evidence you hold, of the actual alleged parking contravention itself because I have seen nothing to back up your allegation whatsoever. The badly-reproduced copies of the photographs on your ‘Parking Charge Notice’ merely show the vehicle and entering and leaving the car park, after queueing and well away from the parking bays, but not the actual alleged parking contravention which your ‘ticket' alleges.

Please send me a photograph of the signs that you display on that specific car park site. Ensure of course that any photograph is contemporaneous to the date of the allegation, shows the terms and conditions in a clear and legible manner, and is taken from the angle of a driver in a car. Please provide me with a diagram showing the locations and layout of those signs at this car park. A generic response with a generic sign will not fulfil this requirement.

If you fail to provide this information - and any other information required by me at a later stage in this challenge process - then you fail to allow me to make an informed decision as the registered keeper of this vehicle. This failure and any breaches of the BPA Code of Practice will be reported to POPLA, the BPA, the DVLA Data Sharing Policy Group and to the judge if you should ever attempt a small claim over this incident.

I expect this PCN to be cancelled forthwith if you cannot or will not substantiate your unsolicited invoice, and of course if you send me a template response or in any way try to pursue this spurious 'change' with attempts to intimidate me with debt collectors, I will not hesitate take the matter further. If this is not cancelled now I will include the landowner/occupier in all future complaints and correspondence because they are the ones to potentially lose business - in particular once it becomes known on various consumer forums and review websites about your threats to their customers.

Regards''