ParkingEye Letter Before Action - what to do next

trisontana

Because PE are sending out so much paperwork to so many people, could the failure to address the issues raised in the OP's letter could just be down to PE being under resourced and to them just sending out any old letter in reply? I must add that I am not defending PE in any way. As Parking Prankster points out in a recent blog:-

Their legal department is in disarray, sending letters to the wrong people, failing to send out letters at all, providing details of one case to another, and deciding not to cancel court cases when they have settled or when the landowner has asked them to cancel the ticket.

In other words a complete shambles!

Coupon-mad

mgxrmw wrote: »

Also it may be worth adding that I can't seem to get an address for the car park owners anywhere, and PE don't seem keen to give me one!

You don't necessarily need the owners, just whoever runs the place if it's a retail park. Normally easy to find a contact number on Google just by searching for the retail park name and looking for local newspaper articles or retail blurb. If unsure just phone the number you think it might be from the Google results, and ask if they are responsible. Then complain assertively about this dreadful harassment.

zzzLazyDaisy

trisontana wrote: »

Because PE are sending out so much paperwork to so many people, could the failure to address the issues raised in the OP's letter could just be down to PE being under resourced and to them just sending out any old letter in reply?

The point is that the Practice Direction on Pre-action Conduct is a procedure set down by the Ministry of Justice that ALL claimants are required to follow.

The letters that PE are sending out do not comply with the PD. Not only do they not comply, but PE are aware of this, owing to the barrage of complaints by people on the receiving end. Yet all they have done is to re-invent their LBA as an LBCCC - which expressly states that it is 'fully compliant with the PD', when it isn't - not by a very long way!

Such actively misleading letters should not even have been approved to be sent out, so in some respects the fact that the letter may or may not have been sent to an unintended recipient is irrelevant. But that's for PE's legal department - and inparticularly its supervising solicitor - to explain to the SRA.

Daisy

mgxrmw

Hi, great news - I just received a letter from PE saying the charges have been cancelled! Big relief, thank you so much for all your help, especially lazy Daisy for your last letter ideas - which must have worked!it seems they know they are handling the process incorrectly but are just hoping people will pay out of fear. I must say I did co sider paying, but decided to be brave as I believe they are scammers and need to be stood up to!
The letter was a standard 'dear sir/madam.' In typical parking eye fashion, they didn't acknowledge any of my previous letter, or sign it!
I though I'd take the time to let you all Know that the charges have been cancelled, as when doing my research before I noticed that not many of these threads tell you the outcome!

Thanks again everyone x

zzzLazyDaisy

mgxrmw wrote: »

I though I'd take the time to let you all Know that the charges have been cancelled, as when doing my research before I noticed that not many of these threads tell you the outcome!

Great news indeed, well done! Also thanks for coming back to tell us the result, the feedback is really helpful.

Daisy