Parking Eye thieves

fr0d0scious

I just read that the invoice applies only to the driver of the vehicle that did the parking.

As no one at the invoice address (the registered owner) was actually driving on this occasion am I even safer here?

Stroma

fr0d0scious wrote: »

I just read that the invoice applies only to the driver of the vehicle that did the parking.

As no one at the invoice address (the registered owner) was actually driving on this occasion am I even safer here?

Providing this is England or Wales they have keeper liability if you don't respond to them, which means they can go to the dvla to get the RK details from them. That is providing they have complied with pofa 2012 and the bpa CoP , don't think any parking company are fully compliant.

hoohoo

fr0d0scious wrote: »

I just read that the invoice applies only to the driver of the vehicle that did the parking.

As no one at the invoice address (the registered owner) was actually driving on this occasion am I even safer here?

Yes and no.

That is old advice pre Oct 1 2012. Nowadays, the registered keeper can also be pursued.

The good news is that to do this, they have to follow certain guidelines, and as this is still new, a lot of the time they fail miserably.

So, you *may* be safer. Certainly, if available, keep any proof that you as the registered keeper were not the driver; get an alibi statement from any witnesses, proofs you were at work, etc.

But its probably best to proceed as if they did follow the right procedures for the moment, which means that the registered keeper (you) is liable.

hoohoo

Stroma wrote: »

But popla will see 2k-3k appeals going by current take up, so there is no way that it will have mass appeal, and there is no way that parking eye will go and issue claims in the numbers you suggest, going on the 10% figure would mean more than 300 claims a week being issued. They would be barred from making claims in such numbers. If barred and they were put on that list their entire scam would fall apart.

Ah sorry, I did not realise there was a limit on the number of claims that can be issued.

Let's hope PEye choose their court victims alphabetically rather than randomly. As someone with a name near the end of the alphabet, I should be relatively safe.

fr0d0scious

hoohoo wrote: »

Yes and no.

That is old advice pre Oct 1 2012. Nowadays, the registered keeper can also be pursued.

The good news is that to do this, they have to follow certain guidelines, and as this is still new, a lot of the time they fail miserably.

So, you *may* be safer. Certainly, if available, keep any proof that you as the registered keeper were not the driver; get an alibi statement from any witnesses, proofs you were at work, etc.

But its probably best to proceed as if they did follow the right procedures for the moment, which means that the registered keeper (you) is liable.

Great info. Thankyou

Stroma

hoohoo wrote: »

Ah sorry, I did not realise there was a limit on the number of claims that can be issued.

Let's hope PEye choose their court victims alphabetically rather than randomly. As someone with a name near the end of the alphabet, I should be relatively safe.

There is no limit in theory how many claims they can issue, but if they are just making claims and not defending them then they could be deemed as vexatious litigants as you pointed out above.

And it will fly in the face of less claims being made to get pofa 2012, 845 in total in 2011, now this year will probably be higher, so how will the bpa account for it?

hoohoo

Stroma wrote: »

There is no limit in theory how many claims they can issue, but if they are just making claims and not defending them then they could be deemed as vexatious litigants as you pointed out above.

And it will fly in the face of less claims being made to get pofa 2012, 845 in total in 2011, now this year will probably be higher, so how will the bpa account for it?

I too look forward to finding out how they account for it. Sadly, I'm guessing that there will be no-one from the government who actually bothers to quiz them on it.

Were the 2011 figures those that actually made it to court, or those for which a claim which was filed (and may have then been settled or dropped before getting to court)?

Stroma

This is the statistics for the period of 2011

1.8m fake tickets issued - according to the home office
circa 630k tickets ignored (about 35%) according to the bpa and various parking companies

FOI request to the courts
845 claims made
49 before a judge
25 wins for the motorists
24 wins for the parking industry

hoohoo

Stroma wrote: »

This is the statistics for the period of 2011

1.8m fake tickets issued - according to the home office
circa 630k tickets ignored (about 35%) according to the bpa and various parking companies

FOI request to the courts
845 claims made
49 before a judge
25 wins for the motorists
24 wins for the parking industry

Does anyone have a link to the original FOI request? I think it is time for a new request, using find and replace (2011 -> 2012)

Stroma

hoohoo wrote: »

Does anyone have a link to the original FOI request? I think it is time for a new request, using find and replace (2011 -> 2012)

The guys over on pepipoo are in the process of doing a FOI request on this, but here is one that outlines how many tickets are issued, as of end of December 2012 there were 1,465,705 requests, with parking eye asking for 540,522 . This figure will go up and if by the same rate parking eye will have asked for 720k RK details for the period

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4501705