Driving around waiting for a space is not parking

Parking-Prankster

ParkingEye lose in court again.


http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/waiting-for-space-is-not-parking.html

peter_the_piper

I've been saying for a long time that PE don't charge for parking, only time on site. This does affect a good few Aldi sites where they are busy at the entrance/exits and at the tills. One could even think the number of tills are regulated to ensure time outs, if one was cynical that is.

Stroma

Just reading that, it looks like that parking eye are being found out at the small claims, couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of scum

There must be a vendetta against them lol, this would be a good one to get transcripts for prankster

spacey2012

We are going to need a bigger tally board, these losses at court for parking Eye are starting to mount up faster than we can keep track.

trisontana

And PE still haven't updated their website news since last September where they boast about all their court wins. I wonder why?

4consumerrights

Good justice here for the OP in question - can imagine difficulties in parking at holiday times.

Are parking eye here the snakes - pythons slowly squeezing every last ££ from unsuspecting motorists - such as their infamous £50 WP offer to settle when principal has instructed cancellation......

Tower Road is another location where there has been reported difficulties in finding spaces at peak times.

trisontana

And some Aldi car parks

Redx

so PE get spanked both at popla and in court as regards the fistral beach car park

you really would think these cretins would stop harassing people and to think they wanted nigh on £200 and lost the lot playing against the house just goes to show how much more will be riding on the re-convened cambridge cases next month , especially when you think of the costs involved when bringing in people like Mr Altaras

we can only hope for even more BIG decisions that go against them because the more they lose, the more the judges make decisions on the various aspects that are in these appeals then the more rope they are hanging themselves with

shame he didnt rule or could not rule on gpeol but at least its good to have some clarification on the definition of parking ( or driving round looking for a space ), or the time taken between entering and exiting not comprising solely of having been "parked"

trisontana

It's just a numbers game for Parking Eye. Unfortunately there are far too many people who just cave in and pay because they think they are dealing with some sort of official parking ticket. Look how many people call it a "fine".

da_rule

Can I suggest adding another point to the standard POPLA appeal template based on this decision:

"Time spent looking for parking.
The driver spent time looking for a parking space. Following the decision in 3JD08399 ParkingEye v Ms H. (Altrincham 17/03/2014) time spent looking for a space does not constitute parking. As such I require ParkingEye [or what ever PPC] to provide evidence that my vehicle was actually parked for a period of time which exceeded the maximum permitted time."

Obviously this would only be suitable for certain PPC's who issue their NTK's via ANPR and where the signage refers to parking (which is a vast majority) and where there isn't a huge overstay (spending 4 hours looking for a space may be excessive). I know that genuine pre-estimate of loss would still be the decision POPLA will general allow an appeal on, but it would be nice to rub ParkingEye's loss in their face.

Stroma

So to bring this thread up to date, prankster has had the transcript donated to the cause by Mr & Mrs X

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/transcript-donated-approved-judgment.html