Parking Eye Home bargains PCN Wrexham Wales

Half_way

achtzen18 wrote: »

To me the manager seemed absolutely useless at this. He said that the head office deals with Parking eye and he has nothing to do with it. He said that I was at fault by overstaying so I should pay the charge or take it up with parking eye directly. It just seemed silly speaking to him. It was like talking to a wall! He wasn't listening. To be honest I think he didn't care. There is no personal implication to him if he refuses to co-operate. I am very surprised though that the letters I sent to the CEO, have had no effect either.

It depends on how far you want to go with this, but a letter to the manager giving him X amount of time to rectify things or you will be taking him/his store to court, it will be worth while reading it to him as well making sure that you remind him that the parking company are his agents and he is responsible for them.
the expert on here with regards to EA breaches is coupon mad and he/she may be able to advise you if this is worth taking further with regards to an EA breach.

Stroma

I think you'll find that coupon is a she

Coupon-mad

Yes indeedy!

achtzen18

In the last week of Feb, I sent a letter to PE reminding them of the POFA and asking them to stop chasing me since I had given them the name of the driver at the time of the incident. I sent an email to DVLA and BPA making a complaint about how PE was in breach of the POFA 2012. Previous to that (in the beginning of Feb), I sent a letter to the CEO of Home bargains, telling her that I received a LBCCC and should legal proceedings start, a counter claim will also be made against them. I haven't received anything from any of them.

It is kind of worrying me since PE haven't even sent a letter to my husband, who was the driver at the time of the incident. Any idea what must be happening?

Coupon-mad

I think I would write again, a snail mail letter signed by BOTH of you, and state that you both now consider the matter closed because you have heard nothing further and the driver has not received any PCN at all.

achtzen18

Coupon-mad wrote: »

I think I would write again, a snail mail letter signed by BOTH of you, and state that you both now consider the matter closed because you have heard nothing further and the driver has not received any PCN at all.

We did as you suggested. 20 days later and still nothing from them

Coupon-mad

Good. Neither of you can be liable then because the keeper has discharged any liability and the driver has never had any PCN or any letters at all. But as it's ParkingEye who are litigious, I would email a complaint to the BPA and say that you have named the driver but PE have refused to deal with the driver and have not replied to confirm your discharge of liability either. Ask the BPA to investigate, because despite you naming the driver before proceedings start, that driver has never had a PCN and therefore has been denied their right of appeal.

Keep all letters and all emails, everything. PE are not nice as you know, and are over-keen on court claims, which should only be a last resort (try telling them that!).

You could email them at [EMAIL="enforcement@parkingeye.co.uk"]enforcement@parkingeye.co.uk[/EMAIL] as well you know, they do reply on that email address and you'd have a paper trail of their reply.

Same issue reported here:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4956268

Rattle PE's cage and that of the BPA until a PCN is received by the driver.

achtzen18

PE finally decided that they will send the driver (my husband) the PCN. He received this PCN last week but it is for the incident that took place last October. Do we still use the template in Post #1 - NEWBIES sticky thread? What is this new thing about incidents taking place before the 13th of June 2014?

Coupon-mad

Good point - I would use a shortened version (minus the drop hands offer and minus the last bit and not saying the purpose of the letter is 'threefold')!

Or use this one borrowed from emanresu on pepipoo which is shorter:


Dear xxxxx

Thank you for your letter. I confirm I was the driver of the car at the relevant time. I understand that you are seeking to hold me responsible for any charge arising out of the event.

I am challenging this notice on the grounds that your signage was inadequate and your demand does not represent a genuine pre-estimate of any loss and was not a genuine offer of a contract.

In this case, I am putting you to strict proof that the signage on which you rely

a) Was visible at the location the car was parked and could be reasonably seen by the driver at the time of the event and that signage complies with the DfT recommendations for size, font and illumination

b) That the information on the sign was coherent and cogent. I would also put you to strict proof that the claim you are making matches these coherent and cogent terms (if indeed they were).

c) I wish you to demonstrate that you have the rights to claim for you losses on this site such as a lease, a contract from the leaseholder or a copy of the Non-Domestic Rating Valuation showing you are conducting a business there and paying rates.

I would also put you to strict proof that your charge represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss and/or the amount does not represent a penalty whose purpose is to deter.

Finally I insist you cancel this charge and confirm the same. Should you disagree with the points above, send a POPLA code so that I can have the matter investigated by your industry's ADR.

For anything other than a cancellation or a POPLA code, my charge is £100 per reply. Acceptance will be by performance.

Love & kisses

4consumerrights

@Achtzen18 - wow at last.... reset the clock


I second coupon's suggestion to use emanresu's letter. You do need to ensure that the DRIVER is noted.

I would recommend that you appeal online.

I would add however that the cancellation or POPLA code should be forthcoming within 35 days and that it is noted that on-line that appeals are responded to within 14 days.

you can also if you want put a hard copy in the post.




However, not sure about the £100 part - as this may make PE dig their heels in. We do want this parking charge quashed in your case considering the trouble and time involved.