parking eye prosecuting an 89 yr old who didn't need a parking ticket

Stroma

Triumphstag wrote: »

Good morning,


I am not surprised by PE or by the outrage, but I am surprised by the lack of sensible advice,
So,
Have you contacted your MP? Parliament drafted and legislated bad law and they must sort it out, we are only 360 days from the next election and irate letters from voters count as the day draws closer.
Did you know that over 50 MPs served in the forces? This means that an round robin email to them should raise some dust. List from Google.
Have you looked for an ex services solicitor, barrister or QC who is willing to give a few hours pro-bono? There must be 100's in this country, possible one is also an MP? I looked on the British Legion web site and they claim 55,000 Twitter follows- I don't Twit or Tweet but someone you know may be able to use this as a starting point.
Have you lent on The British Legion? I'm not military but I have run across their officials and they have always struck me as being kindly and proactive.


TS

You are bloody joking aren't you? Do you really know this situation? Do you know the legal implications of going to a court and defending on legal matters? Going through MPs is good, but they cannot do sod all! Just ask Nick Smith MP for Blaenau Gwent and his battle with Excel Parking!

Really coming here and saying we are not offering sensible is frankly bloody disgraceful! Do you realise how much time and effort we put into this? Do you realise how much off forum help is being done on this?

bazster

Triumphstag wrote: »

Good morning,


I am not surprised by PE or by the outrage, but I am surprised by the lack of sensible advice,
So,
Have you contacted your MP? Parliament drafted and legislated bad law and they must sort it out, we are only 360 days from the next election and irate letters from voters count as the day draws closer.
Did you know that over 50 MPs served in the forces? This means that an round robin email to them should raise some dust. List from Google.

Physician heal thyself.

Lobbying MP's is all very well (god knows I'm always advocating it, and doing it) but an MP can't intervene in a civil dispute between a private individual and a private company.

Furthermore, parliamentary protocol dictates that the only MP who can take action of behalf of an individual is that individual's own MP. It's all very well lobbying lots of MP's but only one of them could actually do anything (if he/she had the power to do so, which in this case he/she doesn't).

In the meantime there is a court case to be defended or avoided here, that is the most urgent matter. Trying to get the law changed can wait.

salmosalaris

I would suggest contacting the head honchos at the Coventry and Rugby Clinical Commissioning Group and also Virgincare

http://www.coventryrugbyccg.nhs.uk

http://www.virgincare.co.uk

The CCG could be FOI'd for a copy of the contract with PE too

Triumphstag

Actually I think you are wrong, PE is owned by Capita- a huge PLC who derive much of their revenue from the public purse, i.e. your money and mine.
It is not in their interests to have MPs standing up in the house and raising the fact that one of their group companies has a very strange business model and is screwing an OAP through the court.
Capita are picking up lots of government/ local government/ health etc contacts at the moment ( it was in the papers yesterday) because the other players, G24 and Serco, were effectively blackballed when they were caught with their hand in the till on tagging.
If you were the CEO of Capita would you put millions of government money on even the off chance of a back lash over a £100?
I know that putting pressure on MPs works, how do you think the BPA pushed through bad law?
Do you really think that the law will be changed without Parliament changing it?
Do you really think that if PE loose at Cambridge Capita will shrug their shoulders and walk away from their £50,000,000 plus purchase?
Of course they won't, they will be lobbying MPs for a change in the law to their benefit. You won't be able to get a table in Westminster for Capita managers and lobbyists wining and dining MPs.
Ts

bazster

So that's it is it? Your answer to getting ParkingEye to back down is to persuade an MP to denounce Capita in the House? Do you know how long that would take? Do you know if it's even possible? Do you realise how hard it is for an MP to get to say anything in the House and how infrequently most of them get to do it?

Meanwhile, back in the real world, we have an 89-year-old with a current court case to fight and who, realistically, will probably be dead before anyone denounces Capita in the House or before any law change even gets tabled let alone passed.

Hot_Bring

Triumphstag wrote: »

Actually I think you are wrong, PE is owned by Capita- a huge PLC who derive much of their revenue from the public purse, i.e. your money and mine.
It is not in their interests to have MPs standing up in the house and raising the fact that one of their group companies has a very strange business model and is screwing an OAP through the court.
Capita are picking up lots of government/ local government/ health etc contacts at the moment ( it was in the papers yesterday) because the other players, G24 and Serco, were effectively blackballed when they were caught with their hand in the till on tagging.
If you were the CEO of Capita would you put millions of government money on even the off chance of a back lash over a £100?
I know that putting pressure on MPs works, how do you think the BPA pushed through bad law?
Do you really think that the law will be changed without Parliament changing it?
Do you really think that if PE loose at Cambridge Capita will shrug their shoulders and walk away from their £50,000,000 plus purchase?
Of course they won't, they will be lobbying MPs for a change in the law to their benefit. You won't be able to get a table in Westminster for Capita managers and lobbyists wining and dining MPs.
Ts

I'm sorry but you're way off the mark here.

If Parking Eye lose the court battle I predict it will be rolled into Equita pretty quickly.

Also, Capita board members aren't that fussed what the public perception of Capita is - they are very used to bad news stories and laugh off the tag of Crapita.

I'm not sure where you get your theory from but mine comes from actually having met and spoken with Paul Pindar and Andy Parker ( as well as a number of other Capita board level execs ).

Stroma

You need to get in touch with reality for gods sake, this will take years of lobbying to get anything done. Nick Smith MP has been fighting Excel Parking for at least 2 years, Excel are still in The Walk Ebbw Vale, they are still issuing tickets despite it being on xRay (Wales Watchdog) twice, and nothing has happened!

This situation is not going to be rectified by talking to MPs or any other group, this will only be stopped if the landowner tells parking eye not to proceed, or parking eye themselves stop. The only way that is going to happen is the strongest complaints possible, and to get the press involved and they are interested!

This has a lot of the issues of lainee case linked earlier in the thread, that being an Equality Act 2010 breach, parking eye and the landowner could land themselves in court facing being done for thousands, there will be a lot of people willing to work on that for free.

trisontana

I forwarded Parking Prankster's blog about this case to both the BPA Ltd and Parking Eye. So far a defening silence from PE, but I did receive this today from the BPA Ltd: :-

[FONT=&quot]Many thanks for your note below[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]I have been asked to look at this matter for you.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Parking Eye were not aware of the background to this case until a response was forthcoming to the issued Court papers. Parking Eye have confirmed that the charge had already undergone a further review in light of the more recent correspondence and were in the process of cancelling this with the County Court prior to this complaint. Having considered everything Parking Eye have cancelled the charge and will be taking no further action. A letter confirming this will be sent to the motorist shortly.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Kind regards[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Steve Clark[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Head of Operational Services[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]British Parking Association [/FONT]


Not knowing the full ins and outs of this case , the cynic in me says it wasn't the "new information" PE received, but the flood of bad publicity PE were getting.

Coventrian Has your friend been informed about this cancellation?

trubster

Fantastic news.

nigelbb

trisontana wrote: »

I forwarded Parking Prankster's blog about this case to both the BPA Ltd and Parking Eye. So far a defening silence from PE, but I did receive this today from the BPA Ltd: :-

[FONT=&quot]Many thanks for your note below[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]I have been asked to look at this matter for you.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Parking Eye were not aware of the background to this case until a response was forthcoming to the issued Court papers. Parking Eye have confirmed that the charge had already undergone a further review in light of the more recent correspondence and were in the process of cancelling this with the County Court prior to this complaint. Having considered everything Parking Eye have cancelled the charge and will be taking no further action. A letter confirming this will be sent to the motorist shortly.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Kind regards[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Steve Clark[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Head of Operational Services[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]British Parking Association [/FONT]


Not knowing the full ins and outs of this case , the cynic in me says it wasn't the "new information" PE received, but the flood of bad publicity PE were getting.

Coventrian Has your friend been informed about this cancellation?

PE had already offered to cancel the case in return for £50. The response from the BPA Ltd doesn't confirm that PE will now be waiving that £50.