Court papers parking eye ** help**

bazster

Did they send you a "Letter Before Action" or "Letter Before Claim", prior to the court papers arriving? I don't mean some letter vaguely threatening court action, I mean a formal notice actually headed "Letter Before Action/Claim".

Semolina_pudding

Hi Bazster, yes they did send me a LBA which I took in the same vane as the others,with the inclusion protection of freedom act as me as the RK, no more or less threatening than the others,using the the word 'may' as opposed to 'will', the last paragraph reading.....
PE is still not in receipt of this payment.As such,we must inform you that unless payment of £85.00 is made within the next 14 days further action may be taken an court proceedings may be issued,which may incur further costs'
I am annoyed re Aldi saying the 'fine' will be quashed but I would still have to pay PE for their costs incurred for hounding me down,paying the DVLA (rubbing hands together, it gets worse doesn't it!) 7 standard letters,printed in 1000,s.I wish I was conversant in law.I am a average 50+ lady just going about my weekly(in this case pre Xmas)shopping.
Is there any chance I could get through a court case without spouting quotes/legalities etc.I am not a criminal, just an ordinary person wanting to be treated fairly without been boxed into a parking offender category, in all honesty I really couldn't give a flying fig about big conglomerates, just fairness & equality for Joe public, I can't be too far wrong can I ???

Semolina_pudding

Hovite,I am sure it will be fine to paste to FB as long as you don't make a reference to me personally,BB is everywhere and they might put 2 and 2 making £85 as I did elaborate in my message.Anything to help the cause, although Aldi still emphasise that they provide FREE car parks & that's how they want it to remain.Another poster stated the car parks are full the store is empty,say no more!

zzzLazyDaisy

Semolina_pudding wrote: »

Is there any chance I could get through a court case without spouting quotes/legalities etc.

The chance of you winning a court case without referring to the legalities and quoting relevant court cases, is somewhere between zero and not very much.

You need help with a properly drafted defence.

I believe there is someone on here who helps with defences, and there are certainly people over on pepipoo.

Coupon-mad

Semolina_pudding wrote: »

Default Re: Pe court claim recd fri 12/07/13 help please
After my efforts I thought had been rewarded by a call from the store manager saying the case would be dropped & I asked for it to be confirmed in writing,it was agreed it would, but after I contacted Aldi via FB private message and today had a call to ask if I had appealed in the correct manner,that would be a NO then! I was advised even though I had proof of spending in store PE would drop the case but I had to pay their costs amounting to £50 !! as I should have followed the correct channels in the specified time scale, basically I have no one to blame but myself I either pay their costs or go to court.The Aldi rep was clearly scripted in the approach and although very pleasant( I was a little upset ) to me gives the impression that they are hand in glove & had no hesitation in suggesting that the landowner & the parking permissions would be all above board???? I was thinking do I pay !!!!!! Turpin at £1 a week after the have cancelled the 'fine' for their many overheads or have my day in court,hmmmmmmm

Not sure why you keep posting stuff that's covered on other threads only recently? You'd learn so much more if you come off your thread and read others as well.

- All the POPLA decisions we know about - including the one you quoted - are already in our sticky (top) thread 'POPLA decisions'. So it's not 'Stop press'.

- we already have threads about them wanting £50 out of people, it's been discussed before, you'd do best to read other threads.

- we have lots of threads about how to defend a PE small claim.

- pepipoo forum has absolutely shed-loads of posts and links and advice on threads just like yours so start reading and learning what to do:

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

No-one says you just pay that £50 you know, but you DO have to deal with this properly or you could find PE win by default whilst you are still off on a tangent!

Why not read the forum a bit more (and pepipoo forum, first few pages, clicking on and reading all the PE small claims cases but NOT posting on them). Calm down and stop believing that you owe any money at all. You do not - but you soon will if you do not respond properly to the claim and get a defence in. Read other threads, search for other threads as there are also some about people who have had small claims from PE and then been told they somehow owe £50 just because PE wasted their time.

Semolina_pudding

Gosh I appear to be irritating some people,apologies, first I mistakenly posted on wrong thread,so started my own,oh well if I can't even do this correctly there's no blooming hope in hell that I could fight a Court case....

Coupon-mad

Semolina_pudding wrote: »

Gosh I appear to be irritating some people,apologies, first I mistakenly posted on wrong thread,so started my own,oh well if I can't even do this correctly there's no blooming hope in hell that I could fight a Court case....

You misunderstand but you really, really would benefit from reading similar posts not just this one. You'd learn about other people's experiences and read useful advice links posted time and again already - as there are hundreds of cases being defended on pepipoo at the moment.

It seems to me that you are going off on tangents; for example writing to the Council was pointless IMHO as it's not their car park, they didn't take on Parking Eye.

Here is a link with info I give everyone who gets a small claim:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=81222

...and most end up posting on pepipoo but you need to understand your efforts should be aimed at defending the claim properly, even for the £50 (unless you decide to pay it).

We know Parking Eye are in some disarray handling all their post at the moment and I would bet that they will not be anywhere like able to show up to every hearing that will come up in the near future. They will send a local solicitor to any that go ahead I suspect and you can then hopefully point out the important stuff like PE's breaches of the BPA Code of Practice(CoP), the requirements of the POF Act and of the Practice Direction on Pre-action Conduct, all of which PE have apparently sidestepped in one way or another.

The only thing a local solicitor will know well IMHO will be the latter, so anyone who has a hearing and goes armed with the breaches of the CoP and the POF Act (and have them printed out in duplicate with the relevant sections highlighted) 'should' get the upper hand on the other side. And should be able to claim their costs too.

Your defence should be in bullet points for now IMHO, a skeleton defence for now which can be expanded as and when they pay the hearing fee. Also including legal cases quoted and why it's an unfair term, not enforceable in contract law - all of which you will find covered in the links from that linked pepipoo thread.

I am so confused by your posts about other tangents (Aldi facebook stuff we already had here in our POPLA decisions thread and an email to the Council that will not halt the court process) I don't even know whether you have acknowledged the claim or sent in your skeleton defence yet?

zzzLazyDaisy

Coupon-mad wrote: »

We know Parking Eye are in some disarray handling all their post at the moment and I would bet that they will not be anywhere like able to show up to every hearing that will come up in the near future. They will send a local solicitor to any that go ahead I suspect [/I]

I heard that they have instructed a barrister who is dealing with all the small claims court cases that go to hearing. As a disclaimer, I should say that's just hearsay, but it would make sense - if correct, it will almost certainly be a pupil barrister or someone just setting out in their career (they won't be able to afford a QC!). If that is true, that person will get up to speed very quickly with the issues - which makes it all the more important to comply with the Pre-Action Conduct, because it is perfectly acceptable for them to keep quiet about issues that don't help their clients case, as it is up to the Defendant to raise those issues. Hopefully any barrister worth their salt when being served with a whole bunch of correspondence threatening sanctions for failure to comply with the Practice Direction, will advise the PPC to drop the case (I appreciate none of this helps the OP as she is past that point, but am just pointing this out in case anyone else is reading this who has received a Letter Before Claim / Action)

Semolina_pudding

Coupon-mad Thanks for the info ,the reason I keep going off on a tangent is because of ALL the input from the 100's of threads I have read on many sites,brain is total overload!!! The reason for the letter to the Council I thought was self explanatory(shows how much I know) It was to ascertain the name on the landowners/agents & hopefully planning regs,for that retail centre for parking, as it had been mentioned that if plans were for 3 hours parking(4 stores) and PE reduced it to 1hr20min THEY were in breach????
The ack to the court needs to be there by 27/7,still a couple of days yet to get my head round this.
In the post today 20/7 I had the expected letter from ALDI AREA HO as a result of my store visit,stating that the case (my ref inc) had been cancelled with PE, but according to the phone call from ALDI HQ yesterday this couldn't be done UNLESS I paid PE £50 for costs incurred....SO......do I still say I will defend my case,your advice is appreciated BTW Aldi HQ said that I should invoice everyone on the internet to enable to pay this invoice as I had been given incorrect advice ha!

Coupon-mad

Semolina_pudding wrote: »

I had the expected letter from ALDI AREA HO as a result of my store visit,stating that the case (my ref inc) had been cancelled with PE.

Well, well, well, that's very nice and surely very useful to your case, proving that the client wants to cancel the fake PCN - so proving there is no loss being sought by them, the principal (Parking Eye merely being the agent)!

See what zzzLazy Daisy advises...

EDITED as I had not twigged that the OP has court papers even though I knew it earlier! Blame the glass of wine!



P.S. did you get the answer from the Council about the planning consent?