ParkingEye- I'm paying

Big_saver

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/search.php?searchid=148744196

MartinsGirl_3

HappyMJ, you've never been to court for them then? Even recently?

Thank you for your constructive post!! I promise to follow up on this thread! At least if I lose it might help people in the same situation make an informed choice.

MartinsGirl_3

Sorry big saver the link didn't work for me?

Umkomaas

MartinsGirl wrote: »

EDIT - I've just noticed you've only got 2 posts to your name, and both on this thread, so you couldn't have taken any personal advice from here, so you've no grounds for any beefing about the forum. Strange attitude?

Sorry didn't see this edit. Yes only have this thread because ive been following the advice on the forum, didn't request any personal advice because other newbies have been told that the information they need is contained withinh many similar threads. Also quite afraid of giving away information that PE can track me down with, but I suppose they already know I've been on here from my Acknowledgement letter! I'm just saying that there is no follow up on here! No encouraging tales!! Please don't take offence!

I don't (and didn't) take offence. But I do get a little irritated and tetchy when people's dilemmas are often prefixed with a suggestion that advice given here has contributed to and increased that dilemma.

'Ignore', in general terms has not been given to first stage cases since late April. Prior to this it worked in 99% of cases in favour of the motorist who chose that route.

Then ParkingEye began their rabid campaign of issuing LBAs and court papers. Advice needed to change to reflect the PPC's switch of direction - and the forum was quick to recognise and respond to this.

Clearly some of those originally advised (correctly at the time) have got caught in the crossover. But the 'blame' for that issue (and implicit accusation) shouldn't be levelled at the forum. Yes, OK, if we were still telling everyone to continue to ignore PE, but we have changed course and motorists are being given current best advice. But it is 'advice' and the motorist can decide to accept and follow, or reject and go their own way.

I (partially) agree with your point that there is no follow up on here, no encouraging tales. If you look at the top of the forum index, the POPLA sticky you will see some 'encouraging tales'. But, the main reason we don't have a whole raft of 'encouraging tales' is that despite the efforts of the forum in getting many people 'off THEIR hook' so few of them can be a*sed to come back and let us know the outcome.

Now that may be frustrating for you MartinsGirl, but I can tell you it's not half as it is frustrating for me (and I thnk I can speak for most of the regular contributors on here) when I could have invested a number of hours of my time in giving advice, then OP never comes back to either say, thanks for your time, parking charge cancelled or despite the advice, I decided to go my own way on this and paid up/going to carry on ignoring/going to chance my arm at court etc, etc.

The final point on this is the number of threads that are started daily are immense and there is a (small) finite number of regular advisers. First stage cases where we recommend appeal, then POPLA, then advise on their POPLA submission, will take almost 3 months before any conclusion is reached (the POPLA service is snowed under, largely because we put in the effort to help develop virtually watertight appeals - and much of this is due to our change of advice from late April). Advice given today and followed through is unlikely to reach completion much before the start of the new year, by which time we will have advised on hundreds of new cases, all joining that conveyor belt, with a 3-month time delay.

So perhaps the above is a little indication why some of us regulars do get a little bit tetchy at times, but it's never personal.

Now, back to business! If you are going to try to see his through, you do need to get your head around the Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct. The following thread was written by a solicitor and is recommended as essential reading once LBAs start to raise their heads. So here's the link on that one:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4705657

HTH

PS - what does Martin make of all this?

trisontana

To add to that. Parking Eye have also been going back through old paperwork and are going after those people who ignored their threats pre October 1012 when the advice was to ignore them. PE have moved the goal posts. Additionally they probably think they have a better chance of winning thoseold cases, as apposed to those which can be appealed at POPLA, where PE keep losing.

razar

Hi MartinsGirl, I can certainly empathise with what you say as I'm in a similar situation myself.
We may be among the first batch to be taken to court, but I am willing to go the distance as I hate being bullied/intimidated by large companies.
My personal circumstances may differ from yours but I consider myself to be a law abiding citizen and a good member of society.
All the more reason to stand up and be counted.
Like you I don't have many posts here but have been a member for a number of years now and regularly use the site for help and advice, some of which is flippant but most of which is useful and comes from well meaning folk.
Looks like we'll be going through this together then, so I'll be keeping a close eye on your case and wish you all the best!
Ray.

Greatest_Player

MartinsGirl wrote: »

Also quite afraid of giving away information that PE can track me down with, but I suppose they already know I've been on here from my Acknowledgement letter!

Had regular posters believed Parking Eye tickets to be enforceable, this forum would not exist. So far you've considered the implications (what if, what if) but have you thought about the content itself? EVEN when court papers land on your mat as they did me a few days ago from the very same Parking Eye. Here is a "push coming to the shove" argument which is valid, straight from the Office of Fair Trading.

So whether you are genuine or trolling, enjoy:

Group 5: Financial penalties - paragraph 1(e) of Schedule 2

Schedule 2, paragraph 1, states that terms may be unfair if they have the object or effect of:

(e) requiring any consumer who fails to fulfill his obligation to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation.
5.1 It is unfair to impose disproportionate sanctions for breach of contract. A requirement to pay more in compensation for a breach than a reasonable pre-estimate of the loss caused to the supplier is one kind of excessive penalty. Such a requirement will, in any case, normally be void to the extent that it amounts to a penalty under English common law. Other types of disproportionate sanction are considered at Part III, Group 18(c).

Greatest_Player

MartinsGirl wrote: »

no one ever seems to post after they have won a case, each thread ends without conclusion.

Just you stick around.

AltheHibby

"Enforceable or not, sounds like it's time your drivers learnt the error of their ways if you receive this many. To inadvertently get a ticket is one thing, to know they are enforceable and then blatantly abuse how the land owners want the land to be used is another thing."

Where did I say they were blatantly abusing? The tickets are from a selection of car parks and include one where they drove in, dropped someone off and drove away without parking. They also include dealing with an emergency. In every case they were free and almost empty car parks where the shops can't afford to lose any more customers.

The only abuse is from PE trying to enforce unenforcable penalties and sending me threatening letters that also wrongly, and by the fact I received them, stupidly accuse me of breaking the law.

Greatest_Player

Amazes me people who make those ignorant remarks, accusing others of abusing when none of us know any other from Adam. The fact is we are all human and some people are bigger risk factors than others. Take me, my commitments may cause me to have to drive a thousand miles some weeks; lots of driving, lots of parking, lots of activity. Occasional parking tickets? Yes. Achieved deliberately because they are unenforceable? No. Period.