Got A ticket from Private eye with Photographic Proof

fazsnatch

Hi guys,

I stayed at a car park for 2 hours when i found out later i could only stay for 1 hour at a local retail park in Rugby. I now been issued a fine of £100/£60.

Even though they got a photograph of my car number plate coming in and leaving, can i still get out of this?

The signs were poor and was very dark to see too.

Fruitcake

fazsnatch wrote: »

Hi guys,

I stayed at a car park for 2 hours when i found out later i could only stay for 1 hour at a local retail park in Rugby. I now been issued a fine of £100/£60.

Even though they got a photograph of my car number plate coming in and leaving, can i still get out of this?

The signs were poor and was very dark to see too.

You do not need to pay.

Read the Sticky threads for Newbies at the top of the page. This will tell you what to do next.

Do not pay, do not ignore, do not say who the driver was.

Come back when you have read what is writ and the more knowledgeable will help you out, but only if you have done your homework first.

trisontana

I presume you mean Parking Eye. Mr.s Hislop does not own a parking company

fazsnatch

Most the stickies seem quite out dated, is there anything that is cut clear. I take it i have to reply to them and not avoid it at any cost

fazsnatch

trisontana wrote: »

I presume you mean Parking Eye. Mr.s Hislop does not own a parking company

Oops parking eye my mistake

Redx

its not a fine , its a parking charge , from parking eye

this is the sticky thread you should be reading

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4816822

tells you everything you need to know and is up to date too

fazsnatch

Thanks Redx, for my circumstance, do you think this is a good letter to send?

Dear Sir/Madam,

Ref: PCN XXXXXXXXX

I am writing as the registered keeper of vehicle XXX1234 to appeal the above ticket. The driver was a genuine customer of the store that day, and the sum you are seeking in relation to an overstay, in a free car park, bears absolutely no relation to any genuine pre-estimate of loss incurred by either you or the landowner.

Please cancel the ticket immediately. If you choose to reject this appeal then please send me a POPLA code so that I may take this up with the independent appeals service.

Yours,

XXXX

fazsnatch

Also this but i do not have a reciept:



Dear G24 Ltd,

With reference to the invoice XXXXX dated XXXXXX, I am the registered keeper and I deny all liability for this charge on the following points:

• Driver was a paying customer at XXX
• No genuine pre-estimate of loss
• Unclear/non-compliant signage
• No legal authority/contract

1) Driver was a paying customer at XXX:

On the date in question (07/12/2013), the driver was a paying customer of XXX, the retailer with which this invoice is associated (proof of receipt provided), and visited the store more than once within the duration of the supposed infraction.

2) This is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss:

The amount of the charge (£XX) is disproportionate to the loss incurred by G24 Ltd and is punitive, contravening the Unfair Terms Act 1997. The Appellant also considers the charge to be a penalty because G24 have alleged a breach of terms and conditions and yet have not quantified their alleged loss which cannot include business running costs (as found in Vehicle Control Services vs Mr R Ibbotson 16th of May 2012) only the costs resulting in overstaying 35 minutes in a free car park. The £XX charge is an unfair term and therefore not binding under the Unfair Terms In Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. Schedule 2 gives and indicative but not exhaustive list of terms which may be regarded as unfair.

Schedule 2 (1) (e):

'Terms which have the object or effect of requiring any consumer who fails to fulfil his obligation to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation'

Regulation 5 (1) says:

'A contractual term which has not been individually negotiated shall be regarded as unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer'

Regulation 5 (2) says:

'A term shall always be regarded as not having been individually negotiated where it has been drafted in advance and the consumer has therefore not been able to influence the substance of the term'

Private parking tickets unrelated to any genuine pre-estimate of loss are unenforceable penalties. The amount claimed by G24 is liquidated damages and, as such, the Operator may only charge a genuine pre-estimate of loss that arises from the alleged contravention.
The Operator charges include a basket of costs, including the cost of erecting site signage and the cost of membership of the BPA, DVLA charges, wages and uniforms which are Operational costs of running the business.

The entirety of the parking charge must be a genuine pre-estimate of loss in order to be enforceable. However, some of the costs referred to do not represent a loss resulting from the alleged breach. For example, were no breach to have occurred, then the cost of parking enforcement, such as erecting signage, would still have been the same.

3) The signage is unclear and not compliant with the BPA Code of Practice:

The Appellant believes the signs and parking terms were unclear and requests G24 Ltd disclose their evidence and signage map/photos specifically showing the height of the signs and where they are at the entrance, whether a driver in a car can see and read them when deciding to drive in. The Appellant believes the signage onsite is too high, too small and not affixed within a close enough radius of the entrance and therefore easy to miss. It does not state any terms and conditions nor the amount of free parking. The signs in the car park are also too high and too small and it’s not reasonable that any driver of any age or height can read and understand them. The Appellant believes the signs are unclear and non-compliant.

4) You do not have authority or contract to issue these invoices:

G24 Ltd do not own this car park and are acting merely as agents for the owner/occupier. G24 Ltd have not provided the Appellant with any evidence that it is lawfully entitled to demand money from the driver, since they do not own nor have any interest or assignment of the title of the land in question. The Appellant does not believe G24 Ltd has the necessary legal capacity to enter into a contract with a driver of a vehicle parking in the car park, or indeed to allege a breach of contract (as evidenced in the Higher Court findings in VCS vs HMRC 2012). The Appellant puts G24 Ltd to strict proof that they have the necessary authorisation at this location. This would be in the form of a signed and dated contract with the landowner/occupier specifically evidencing the ability of G24 Ltd to pursue parking charges to the courts.

I require that you immediately cancel this invoice. If you reject this appeal, please forward a POPLA verification code to appeal to them independently. As you are aware POPLA always uphold appeals on the above.

If you do reject the appeal and insist upon taking the matter further I must inform you that I may claim my expenses from you. The expenses I may claim are not exhaustive but may include the cost of stamps, envelopes, travel expenses, legal fees, etc. By continuing to pursue me you agree to pay these costs when I prevail.

Yours Faithfully

The keeper

Redx

fazsnatch wrote: »

Thanks Redx, for my circumstance, do you think this is a good letter to send?

Dear Sir/Madam,

Ref: PCN XXXXXXXXX

I am writing as the registered keeper of vehicle XXX1234 to appeal the above ticket. The driver was a genuine customer of the store that day, and the sum you are seeking in relation to an overstay, in a free car park, bears absolutely no relation to any genuine pre-estimate of loss incurred by either you or the landowner.

Please cancel the ticket immediately. If you choose to reject this appeal then please send me a POPLA code so that I may take this up with the independent appeals service.

Yours,

XXXX

that seems ok as a RK appeal although this is a better one

Dear Parking Eye,

As the registered keeper of (reg) I'm in receipt of your parking invoice xxxxxx dated xxxxxx. I wish to invoke your appeals process as all liability to your company is denied on the following:

1) this charge is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss
2) your signage does not comply with the BPA Code of Practice
3) you do not have the authority or permission to issue invoices at this location

These points and others will be raised with Popla should you not accept this appeal, and you will be expected to provide a full breakdown of of your alleged loss, and your full unredacted contract with the landowner.

If you do reject the challenge and insist upon taking the matter further I must inform you that I may claim my expenses from you. The expenses I may claim are not exhaustive but may include the cost of stamps, envelopes, travel expenses, legal fees, etc. By continuing to pursue me you agree to pay these costs when I prevail.

Please issue your cancellation within 35 days of this letter or supply a popla code to appeal to them.

Any communication that does not either confirm cancellation or include a POPLA verification code shall be reported to the BPA as a breach of their Code of Practice - the BPA recently issued guidance to all members to remind them of this fact. Such communication may also be deemed harassment and pursued accordingly.


Faithfully

as for your latter post, that is G24 which is completely different to PE so not sure you actually read it properly , nor tried to apply it to your own circumstances

Guys_Dad

I would add to Redx's letter the bit about you being a genuine customer and submitting proof of purchases.

I would make it point 1
1) Driver was a paying customer at XXX:

On the date in question (07/12/2013), the driver was a paying customer of XXX, the retailer with which this invoice is associated (proof of receipt provided), and visited the store more than once within the duration of the supposed infraction.


I would then write, "I am sure that given this information, you will cancel the charge.

Should you not agree, then....." and then add Redx's good points.

fazsnatch

Only issue with that part is I do not have a reciept now which is the only issue. Should i take it that part out?