Advice please re Parking charge notice from Park Eye in Newquay

Umkomaas

JFChils wrote: »

Parking Eye have now rejected my appeal so I have to now appeal to POPLA and try the land owner. I phoned Newquay golf club today and they told me that they own the land and franchise it out to Parking Eye. Any advice on what would be good to put into the letters to either?

Thanks

Look at the sticky POPLA Decisions here:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4488337

Pick any decision where PE was the operator and develop your own appeal around one of those. PE has lost every single one of them

Important points to include are:

1. Signage
2. Question PE's proprietary interest in the land (especially given the golf club's statement that it is franchised to PE)
3. Contract with the landowner (again in light of the above)
4. Genuine pre-estimate of loss (GPEOL)
5. Punitive (a penalty and therefore unlawful) nature of the charges

Here's another handy reference resource:

http://www.parkingcowboys.co.uk/popla/

You might also want to search this forum for previous Tower Road/PE threads (there's quite a number) and check out any POPLA appeals in those.

Draft out your appeal and post it here; we will look it over and advise. Take your time with it, as the more you understand what it is you are writing, the more it will hang together as a credible appeal.

You can copy and paste from previous appeals, but tweak it here and there to suit your circumstances and writing style.

Whilst I suggest you take your time over this, you must keep an eye on the deadline (28 days from the date of your rejection letter), as it is rigid - no second chance. Miss out on getting this to POPLA and you're virtually guaranteed court papers from PE.

HTH

Coupon-mad

JFChils wrote: »

Parking Eye have now rejected my appeal so I have to now appeal to POPLA and try the land owner. I phoned Newquay golf club today and they told me that they own the land and franchise it out to Parking Eye. Any advice on what would be good to put into the letters to either?

Thanks

Several threads have Parking Eye POPLA appeal wording on them. Try searching for 'Newquay' as a keyword on this forum first page (on the right next to 'forum tools' immediately above all the sticky threads). You will find lots of Tower Rd and Fistral threads, many with POPLA appeal wording already done and ready for you to crib from. And here's a link to POPLA winning appeal examples which are not so tailored to your case unless you happen to spot a similar one:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/62180281#Comment_62180281

In other people's threads they have said the Golf Club are useless BUT that doesn't mean they shouldn't get yet another complaint letter about PE. Complaints about PE's aggressive tactics must make this whole subject a right pain for the Golf Club, takes up too much time when they could be on the golf course! Could make a difference when the parking contract runs out, so every complaint is a nail in the coffin of a PPC contract.

surfboy1

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Several threads have Parking Eye POPLA appeal wording on them. Try searching for 'Newquay' as a keyword on this forum first page (on the right next to 'forum tools' immediately above all the sticky threads). You will find lots of Tower Rd and Fistral threads, many with POPLA appeal wording already done and ready for you to crib from.

In other people's threads they have said the Golf Club are useless BUT that doesn't mean they shouldn't get yet another complaint letter about PE. Complaints about PE's aggressive tactics must make this whole subject a right pain for the Golf Club, takes up too much time when they could be on the golf course! Could make a difference when the parking contract runs out, so every complaint is a nail in the coffin of a PPC contract.

I have a bit of a dialogue going with Newquay town councillor, he is of the opinion that he can do nothing about parking eye because they are a private company and the car parks that they infest are private car parks. Seems like I am p***ing in the wind with him!

newholme30

surfboy1 wrote: »

I have a bit of a dialogue going with Newquay town councillor, he is of the opinion that he can do nothing about parking eye because they are a private company and the car parks that they infest are private car parks. Seems like I am p***ing in the wind with him!

Hmmm can't or won't do anything more like....I have a keen interest in Newquay being ruined by these parking experiences, the valuation department should be very interested in the rates not being paid at these cash cows.

Hovite_2

newholme30 wrote: »

Hmmm can't or won't do anything more like....I have a keen interest in Newquay being NOT ruined by these parking experiences, the valuation department should be very interested in the rates not being paid at these cash cows.

I've added the word I hope you missed out !

GAJASA3

Just heard from POPLA that my appeal has been successful. They said it was because the fine was not proportional to the costs incurred.

Thanks very much to everyone who gave me advice. I found an appeal letter that looked relevant and added some extra bits in to cover my situation.

Thanks again and it is def worth appealing.

bod1467

Can you add your appeal decision text to the POPLA Decisions thread? (Redact any personal/identifiable info).

kirkbyinfurnesslad_2

Could you copy and post the decision so we can add it to our growing collection please

Coupon-mad

JFChils wrote: »

Just heard from POPLA that my appeal has been successful. They said it was because the fine was not proportional to the costs incurred.

Thanks very much to everyone who gave me advice. I found an appeal letter that looked relevant and added some extra bits in to cover my situation.

Thanks again and it is def worth appealing.

Well done! Please let us see the full decision including Assessor's name (just remove your name and car reg, and location if you prefer).

GAJASA3

PARKING ON PRIVATE LAND APPEALS
PO Box 70748 London EC1P 1SN
0845 207 7700

Parking on Private Land Appeals is administered by the Transport and Environment Committee of London Councils
Calls to Parking on Private Land Appeals may be recorded
20 December 2013
Reference 6062843071
always quote in any communication with POPLA
(Appellant)
-v-
ParkingEye Ltd (Operator)
The Operator issued parking charge notice number 470984/711449
arising out of the presence at Tower Road Newquay, on 14 September
2013, of a vehicle with registration mark
The Appellant appealed against liability for the parking charge.
The Assessor has considered the evidence of both parties and has
determined that the appeal be allowed.
The Assessor’s reasons are as set out.
The Operator should now cancel the parking charge notice forthwith.
6062843071 2 20 December 2013
Reasons for the Assessor’s Determination
On 14 September 2013 at Tower Road Newquay, 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 was parked at the site
without purchasing the appropriate parking time despite signage at the site
to indicate that this was necessary to do so. There is evidence to support that
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, registration number , enter the site at 14:01 and exit at 15:21,
a total stay of 1 hour and 20 minutes. Further evidence from the Operator’s
whitelist database shows that the same vehicle was registered as having
purchased parking time of 1 hour only.
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 £100 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 operational
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
does not amount to commercial justification.
The Operator states that they have incurred the costs 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
6062843071 3 20 December 2013
Operator has proved that the amount for the parking charge notice 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 amount was a genuine pre-estimate
of loss.
Accordingly, this appeal must be allowed.
Farah Ahmad
Assessor