LETTER BEFORE COUNTY COURT CLAIM - Parking Eye

Lazos

Bit of Churchill! Love it

nigelbb

PE were applying for retrospective planning permission so it looks like they put the signs up & then months later somebody grassed them up to the planning department.

Lazos

That was a question I was looking to ask.

Even though it is refered to as retrospective (They applied in July initially) as the decision was not confirmed until 23/12/13, any PCNs issued prior to this date would surely be invalid as they did not have the appriopriate permissions?

Coupon-mad

Not that simple IMHO.

nigelbb

Lazos wrote: »

That was a question I was looking to ask.

Even though it is refered to as retrospective (They applied in July initially) as the decision was not confirmed until 23/12/13, any PCNs issued prior to this date would surely be invalid as they did not have the appriopriate permissions?

If the PP was granted retrospectively then it was de facto in force when the PCN was issued.

Lazos

Updates:

Nick Hanley has not responded since I pointed out the land was in his name on the Planning Permission - I have not chased any form of response and still don't intend to.

No correspondance from PE has been recieved.

BPA - Have advised,

"We will investigate the matter with Parking Eye. However, it seems your appeal was received outside the 28 day timeframe and therefore Parking Eye do not have to consider your appeal or provide POPLA details.

We will contact the operator for their comments on the matter. However, please be aware we do not have the authority to get tickets cancelled.

Kind regards,
AOS Investigations Team"

I responded:

"Thank you for your reply.

I appreciate that, but my understanding of the BPA Code of Practice is that appeals are not limited to the 28 days and therefore can be reviewed after this timeframe.

I understand that you cannot have the ticket cancelled, it is the poor communication and response provided by ParkingEye that is the main concern. I am looking to ensure that we do not waste a County Courts time when there is a means of Alternative Dispute Reconciliation that can be utilised.

Thank you for investigating and I look forward to the results."

No reply from City Council(Not expected for two weeks)

I heavily amended the Original Post letter, using mostly CMs letter draft and adding the counter-claim reference that should have been in my inital appeal. Sent that today, Will post the actual letter to this thread soon.

Thanks again for all help so far.

nigelbb

Lazos wrote: »

Updates:

Nick Hanley has not responded since I pointed out the land was in his name on the Planning Permission - I have not chased any form of response and still don't intend to.

He is probably a bit red faced now having been caught out in his terminological inexactitude after all that bluster about setting his £450/hour solicitors on you.

Lazos

I thought his 'integrity' would see him apologise and have this cancelled. As a result of his negative inital response, I'd have preferred this to be linked to the 'successful complaints' thread as oppose to...POPLA appeals or CCC wins.

If it goes to CC, I do foresee his statement being important...Ok leave it now Lazos...

Lazos

BPA:

"Thank you for your reply.

We have sent the investigation off to the operator.

However, please be aware our Code does state an appeal should be sent in within 28 days. If an appeal is sent in outside the timeframe it is up to the operator as to whether they will look in to the matter. "

spacey2012

If you were to put this evidence before the Judge I can see you would get an adjournment and a granted order to have this person brought before the court to settle once and for all who owns the land.
If they have provided a fake statement, I wonder if it might be worth having the new directer of parking eye brought in as well along with the signatories.

This could be the case that breaks the straw that breaks the camels back.