Successful complaints about private parking tickets - how to get them cancelled!

Boult22

CP Plus Ltd (PO Box number in Boreham Wood)

AoD

This thread is for "Successful complaints about private parking tickets".

Please start your own thread so the regulars can help you.

Italianboy

Dear MSE users out there, I am going to type what POPLA wrote on the letter that I've finally received in December, after my wife overstayed at Morrison's Wood Green (London) in July.

"On the *******2013 at Morrison's ******, the appellant was issued with a parking charge notice for breaching the terms and conditions of the parking site.
It is the operator's case that the appellant's vehicle overstayed the maximum stay of 2 hours at the parking site.
There is evidence to support tat there was adequate signage erected at the site to inform motorists of the parking terms and conditions.
There is also evidence from the operator's automatic number plate recognition system which shows the appellant's vehicle, reg ***** enter the site at ****and exit at ***** a total stay of ****.
The appellant has made a number of submissions, however I will only elaborate on the one submission that I am allowing this appeal on, namely that the parking charge amount is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss.
The signage produced by the operator states that a failure to comply with the terms and conditions will lead to a charge of £85 being issued. This wording indicates that the charge represents damages for a breach of the parking contract and therefore the charge must be a genuine pre-estimate of loss.
The burden is on the operator to prove that the parking charge is a genuine pre-estimate of loss. Although the operator has produced a breakdown of costs incurred in managing the parking site, this is a general list of operation costs and does not address the loss that was caused by the appellant's breach of the terms and conditions of parking.
The operator has stated that there is a commercial justification for the parking charge and they have listed general business costs, however this cost does not amount to commercial justification.
The operator states that they have incurred the cost of, amongst other things, the erection and maintenance of signage in the site. However these costs were not incurred as a direct result of the alleged breach, but would have been incurred regardless of whether the appellant breached the terms and conditions of the parking site. I am therefore not satisfied that the operator has proved that the amount of the parking charges is a genuine pre-estimate of loss.
In consideration of all the evidence before me, I find that the operator has failed to prove that the parking charge is a genuine pre-estimate of loss.
Accordingly, this appeal must be allowed.

*************
Assessor"


If you want to know the whole story have a look at my thread, but it is nothing different from other PCN issued to thousands of motorists like me and you.
I am so happy to have won, and it is all down to MSE, so thank you again !

Stroma

The above should be on the popla thread, but well done anyway

prosnap

Parking Eye chickened out on me today. I sent this appeal to their charge notice .....





I was the driver of this vehicle at the time of this "Mickey Mouse" charge


Following legal advice, I wish to challenge this PCN.


My challenge is partly based on the assertion that your parking charge does not represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss to yourself or the landowner. In every case where a motorist has raised this issue against you, POPLA have accepted the appeal. You are therefore fully aware that there is no prospect of your charge being upheld.


If you do reject the challenge and insist upon taking the matter further I must inform you that I will claim my expenses from you. The expenses I will claim are not exhaustive but may include the cost of stamps, envelopes, travel expenses, legal fees, etc. By continuing to pursue me you agree to pay these costs when I prevail.



1. Your ANPR equipment is obviously faulty. The two photos that you have provided represent two separate visits to the services. Proof will be provided in court should you decide to take this any further.



2. Your claim is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss.



3. I believe your company does not have sufficient interest in the car park to issue contracts to anyone.
(BPA CoP Section 7, a landowner contract must specifically allow Parking Eye to pursue charges in your own name in the courts and grant you the right to form contracts with drivers. I require Parking Eye to produce a copy of the contract with the landowner as I believe it is not compliant with the CoP and without it, Parking Eye have no legal standing nor authority at this site which could impact on visiting drivers.)

If you reject this appeal, I require within 35 days a POPLA verification code for me to appeal independently as per the requirements set out on the POPLA web site, further supported by the BPA Code of Practice.

You have been given the reasons for the appeal above. I have nothing further to currently add, and will not respond to any correspondence from your company unless it contains the POPLA code.

Be aware that there will be formal complaints to POPLA and to the BPA if there is no POPLA code on any rejection that you supply.


Yours Faithfully










They then send this email today ......




Dear Sir / Madam,
We refer to the Parking Charge incurred on ** December 2013 at 00;00;00, at Welcome Break ***** (South) car park.
We can confirm that this Charge has been cancelled and there is no outstanding payment due on this account.
Kind Regards,
ParkingEye Team












Are they starting to run scared? ...... And when did I set up an account?

trisontana

"Kind regards" they say through gritted teeth.

Bubbles_Barker

Success!

Having sent a template letter to Highview regarding a £125 'fine' for staying too long in Hereford Retail Park I wrote directly to Sebastian James, the CEO of Dixons. Got a letter back from Dixons - very polite, saying if I sent them the details of the 'fine' they would get in touch with Highview via the retail park and try and get it overturned. Got a call today from the park manager saying that it had indeed been overturned and to ignore any further demands.
Thank you Sebastian James and to this site for all the good advice and templates!

prosnap

Did you ask for that in writing?

Bubbles_Barker

Didn't need to - a letter is 'in the post'.

gingercheapskate

This is the short version but I wanted to share my success with you all!

I received a windscreen fine from NPE in Norwich on Earlham Road in a parade of shops and appealed it. This was in August. I received a rejection letter. Having spoken to several people I ignored it (doh) and received a debt collector letter for £149 which expired on 3 Jan.

As a result of advice on here I phone Co Op Head Office and the first person I spoke to said they would send me a cheque for the full amount by Special Delivery as they are having trouble getting these charges cancelled so would rather pay so I'm not being chased.

I'm a bit sad that the company get their money but am relieved it's over.