IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

[TEXT DELETED BY FORUM TEAM] parking eye

Options
1356

Comments

  • Well done to Bargepole and team!

    Has anyone noticed that whenever we report a success at court against parking eye - we sure as hell get a newbie poster claiming to have a CCJ against them.

    https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4851977

    NB this also happened the last time Bargepole reported the three court losses.

    It's for that reason that I'm bumping this thread. I'll continue to do it so other newbies see this first.
  • ParkingEye lost two more cases. I look forward to reading the details. ParkingEye have lost several cases recently. ParkingEye have lost all the recent POPLA cases where GPEOL was submitted.
    All in all once the forums fight back.

    PARKINGEYE LOSES.
  • Can I ask what GPEOL means?
  • Genuine pre estimate of loss
    Proud to be a member of the Anti Enforcement Hobbyist Gang.:D:T
  • hoohoo
    hoohoo Posts: 1,717 Forumite
    ParkingEye lost two more cases. I look forward to reading the details. ParkingEye have lost several cases recently. ParkingEye have lost all the recent POPLA cases where GPEOL was submitted.
    All in all once the forums fight back.

    PARKINGEYE LOSES.

    Hello. Can I correct you on one point?

    ParkingEye have lost all POPLA cases, ever, where GPEOL was submitted, not just recent cases.

    To clarify, ParkingEye have lost every single case at POPLA, where GPEOL was raised as an issue.

    In other words, ParkingEye have never won at POPLA if the motorist queried the level of their charge was truly a GPEOL.

    POPLA work on the basis of law, and they have therefore found that all ParkingEye charges are unlawful.

    Or, for the benefit of investors, Capita threw £57 million down the toilet to buy a company whose charges have no basis in law, as repeatedly shown by POPLA.
    Dedicated to driving up standards in parking
  • bod1467
    bod1467 Posts: 15,214 Forumite
    hoohoo wrote: »
    as repeatedly shown by POPLA.

    And also the courts, as I recall, when No GPEoL was included in the defence. (I think in one case the judge didn't object to the GPEoL assessment, but dismissed the case on the basis of No Authority anyway).
  • fil_cad
    fil_cad Posts: 837 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 500 Posts Photogenic
    POPLA work on the basis of law, and they have therefore found that all ParkingEye charges are unlawful.
    .[/QUOTE] Well in that case this looks like another ppi type of scandle, and all those poor people that have paid the scammers must be due a full refund with at least 6% interest
    PPCs say its carpark management, BPA say its raising standards..... we all know its just about raking in the revenue. :eek:
  • esmerobbo
    esmerobbo Posts: 4,979 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts
    Bowes100 wrote: »
    Can I ask what GPEOL means?
    Genuine pre estimate of loss

    Luckily you got your answer.

    Or if you prefer you can have Rachel's PE version which is a thousand word essay, backed up by a barrister's opinion. However it's only them who recognize it!
  • trisontana
    trisontana Posts: 9,472 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    esmerobbo wrote: »
    Luckily you got your answer.

    Or if you prefer you can have Rachel's PE version which is a thousand word essay, backed up by a barrister's opinion. However it's only them who recognize it!

    Not forgetting Steve Clark of the BPA who also agrees with Rachel that day-to-day running costs can be counted as "losses":-

    [FONT=&quot]Your note does not change my contention that a genuine pre-estimate of our loss should i[/FONT][FONT=&quot]nclude the costs in managing the parking location to ensure compliance to the stated terms & conditions and the costs incurred in following up on any breaches of these identified.[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]I would suggest that in the examples provided, the operators have failed to provide strong enough evidence of how their charges are calculated and this is why POPLA have found against them. If you could detail the operators concerned to me, I will ensure that the appropriate training takes place.[/FONT]

    [FONT=&quot]Kind regards[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]Steve[/FONT]
    What part of "A whop bop-a-lu a whop bam boo" don't you understand?
  • Sadly Bams has failed to reappear after needing help with his CCJ over a PE case. Shame he/she couldn't find the help needed. You are a cynical lot. It's almost as if you believe that parking companies stoop to underhand methods to trick people into thinking these companies run a fair and ethical business.

    Speaking of which. Where's Perky these days? I miss him. He was funny, he was!!
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 350.9K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453.5K Spending & Discounts
  • 243.9K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 598.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 176.9K Life & Family
  • 257.2K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.