PE Judgement for Claimant received

bams_2

spacey2012 wrote: »

This is another ! from PE resident troll.
IGNORE, they want it on front page.

I've noticed that advice on this matter has changed so maybe this thread should be on the front page.

I may be silly and naive for ignoring the Claim form but I am not a troll and you have a bad attitude.

Coupon-mad

The advice changed a year ago and was NEVER telling people to ignore a small claim. Small claims have always been a (rare) feature of the PPC modus operandi and to ignore one was against advice, old and new.

spacey2012

We do see these post, all claiming to be "confused" yet all containing very well placed 10 key words all correctly spelt and all in the same template order.
You may be genuine, but the chances of you coincidently falling on to the set keywords in the set order.
Somehow, I doubt.

bams_2

Stroma wrote: »

It's always worth complaining to them, but don't lose sight of the fact that you have 28 days to pay, so if they are not being helpful you may need to claim against them over this. But you will still need to pay the claim against you first.

Thank you. I will follow your advice as many people have sent letters of complaint to my local newspaper.

Stroma

bams wrote: »

I've noticed that advice on this matter has changed so maybe this thread should be on the front page.

I may be silly and naive for ignoring the Claim form but I am not a troll and you have a bad attitude.

There's no need to have yet another sticky thread, all advice you need on this are permanently on the first page, we can't do anything more

bams_2

spacey2012 wrote: »

We do see these post, all claiming to be "confused" yet all containing very well placed 10 key words all correctly spelt and all in the same template order.
You may be genuine, but the chances of you coincidently falling on to the set keywords in the set order.
Somehow, I doubt.

I not going to apologise for the way in which I write. I believe my well placed words, which reflect similar posts, are due to the fact that I am copying them from the Judgement for Claimant form which others whom you believe to be trolls are also referring to.

I think people who receive letters from the court should also speak out so there is more awareness that the letters from parking eye should not be ignored (which I now know is current advice). I don't like name calling and I will repeat: I am not a troll.

Coupon-mad

No, it was ALWAYS the advice not to ignore a claim form. And there is a lot of awareness about PE's latest tactics on this in the forum in 2013, on page one already in lots of info threads & links. It's a shame you ignored the chance to defend it, as cases can be won.

I did state what I think your options are and was serious when I suggested a claim against the retail park. As in my reply above, genuine customers are normally exempt but no-one tells them...that's both PE's fault and whoever contracts them there, and is an unfair term in contract law.

bams wrote: »

Thank you for your reply. Are you saying that I should contact the landowner and ask them to pay?

In a manner of speaking yes, but formally (a Letter before County Court Claim) and sent by snail mail to whoever contract PE there. We know that ParkingEye normally have a secret clause with retail park contracts, that people with a receipt can get the charge cancelled. But they don't tell the customers this in any signage to it's an unfair term. If this was my relative I would consider paying the charge now you've managed to ignore court, and immediately send a strong complaint letter to whoever runs the Retail Park asking for their explanation as to why genuine customers are being fleeced like this and why you were never told in any signs or at the Store tills, that customers were exempt if they showed a receipt (something you have found out too late)? Try to draw out a response on that point, for example ask if there's a cut off like a £30 spend whereby the Store could have cancelled it (we know this is the case in some PE contracts).

Then depending on their reply, follow it with a 'Letter before County Court Claim' for your losses (£150) and distress (could be £150 again?), and court fee.

If there's only one Retail Store in the car Park then the complaint goes to the CEO of that Store, same sort of wording, try to dig for on what basis it 'could' have been cancelled if you had known...

People fighting back like that is one way to get PPC contracts stopped at renewal time. You have been well and truly bitten - so BITE BACK! And some retailers and Managing Agents would pay you rather than be dragged to court under any circumstances, especially if you said you were going to publicise the outcome. Worth a punt for a £35 court fee...but write a complaint first to elicit a written response & information about how they could have cancelled this if you'd known. It helps your case if you can show a 'hidden term' that has caused you loss.

android26

bams wrote: »

... letters from parking eye should not be ignored ...

Why just Parking Eye specifically?

Stroma

android26 wrote: »

Why just Parking Eye specifically?

Probably because they are the most litigant at the moment, though ignore is still an option providing that you know exactly what you are ignoring and the possible consequences of that.

Half_way

The only issue with flat out ignoring, is that there are countless others out there who are not wise to the ins and outs of private parking.
The more complaints a retailer gets, and even better the more people that claim against a retailer, or take action against the retailer/car park owner as a result of the actions of their agents the better.