Parking Eye 'fine'

Chrisk

I also received a 'fine' from Parking Eye for parking in a retail park car park longer than the free period. I had used that car park on previous dates for far longer stays so rather stupidly didn't pay attention to any signage that may be there. My work (RK) has been receiving letters which I advised to ignore. They have now sent a letter from Debt Recovery Plus which I believe to just be a part of the PE ring. I rang them anyway to let them know as a debt collection agency there is no debt to be collected and they 'advised' that PE will go to court and are in fact one of the largest issuers of CCJs in the UK. On asking if PE were the land owners I was told that as they were contracted by the lonad-owners they could take me to court as Land-Holders. I asked to clarify if Parking Eye were leasing the land but the agent repeated that PE were Land-Holders as they had been contracted to enforce parking restrictions. What is the reality behind this?
Going by other things I have heard there is a likelihood of going to court. In this case it would be far better if I went to court rather than having my boss have to go. Also has anyone had experience of successful challenges and could suggest some useful defences? I am thinking of the defence that no contract was entered into as I did not read any of the signs having been there before and being 'an idiot in a hurry'. The retail park in question is predominately empty as most of the units have shut down, that I'm hoping could help me in that the charge is disproportionate to the losses suffered by the land-owner. It also occurred to me that as they only had pictures of me entering and leaving the park I could state they had no actual proof I had parked. I often drive around pointlessly for hours trying to get my infant daughter to sleep, maybe this was one of those times.

spacey2012

the chances of getting court papers are nearly 50,000 / 1
3/4 of a million ignore this scam every year.

bondy_lad

its not a "fine",merely a request for money,complete and utter SCAM by parking spy(eye),,,you can choose simply to ignore or appeal (your appeal WILL be refused) so if you do ask them for a code to go down the POPLA route,which will cost parking spy £27-00 + vat to do so.

Coupon-mad

'Land-holder' is term they have plucked from the DFT information on the Protection of Freedoms Act (nowt to worry about).

There's plenty wrong with PE's position that would make a case very defendable in a small claim which is exceedingly rare - like winning the lottery!

See my usual reply to newbies in post #14 here, read the links too so you can make an informed decision about whether to appeal (certainly don't pay!):

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4458671

I recommend using the 'challenge the fake PCN and then use POPLA to win it' route, not ignoring. Come back here for help to word a winning POPLA appeal, when you get the rejection from PE. Not sure why you've allowed all the letters to go to your workplace (which effectively leaves THEM 'liable' which they won't be happy about!) why did you not simply hook PE in your direction with a letter in response as soon as the first one arrived, which is what we always recommend for lease/hire cars?

Just re-reading what you've said, you may even be too late for POPLA, what dates are on which letters?

Chrisk

The date of the infringement goes back to November last year so well past the POPLA stage. I followed advice I had seen at the time to just ignore all correspondence so I decided not to send a letter and not aknowledge them at all to avoid giving them anything that they could twist into acceptance or recognition of any kind. I've heard they are are more likely to proceed further now, probably due to so many people getting wiser and ignoring their letters.
The fact it is a work car is not that much of an issue as it is my dad's company so there will be no problems except I don't want him to waste his time attending court. As the letter is adressed to the company an employee like myself could easily attend as a representative.

BTW the link you have posted does not seem to work.

Coupon-mad

Chrisk wrote: »

The date of the infringement goes back to November last year so well past the POPLA stage. I followed advice I had seen at the time to just ignore all correspondence so I decided not to send a letter and not aknowledge them at all to avoid giving them anything that they could twist into acceptance or recognition of any kind. I've heard they are are more likely to proceed further now, probably due to so many people getting wiser and ignoring their letters.
The fact it is a work car is not that much of an issue as it is my dad's company so there will be no problems except I don't want him to waste his time attending court. As the letter is adressed to the company an employee like myself could easily attend as a representative.

OK, thanks for clearing that up. You can carry on ignoring then!

If in the unlikely event of getting real small claim papers do post again here and on pepipoo forums where they write free defences to people with a small claim:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showforum=60

HTH, you won't need that defence though.

Chrisk

Thanks for the help.
Let's hope that more and more people find out about how to contest PPCs and their losses on DVLA checks and POPLA appeal fees soon make this nasty industry collapse and all involved find a fairer and better way to make money.