Parking eye Appeal rejected - advice needed

Coupon-mad

That will win, no probs.

discusdude

Thanks I hope so. will be sending it off tonight wish me luck

DeanoB

CAN ANYONE HELP?
I received a charge from ParkingEye for overstaying in Aldi's car park and sent them this:

Ref Number: XXXXXXXXXX
Vehicle Registration: XXXXXXX
Date of Event: XXXXXXX
Date Issued: XXXXXXX

I received an invoice about a driver using my vehicle on the 27 April 2014. As the keeper of the vehicle, I decline, as is my right, to provide the name of the drivers at the time and I submit I am not liable to any charge.

I shall not be paying the sum demanded as I stand on solid ground on my dispute and will take further action.

Firstly, the law states that the imposition of charges for parking or trespassing on another persons property must truly reflect the actual loss incurred by that action.

Since the vehicle was parked in a free car park and the landowner suffered no actual loss this invoice is invalid and been proven to be unenforceable in Hight Court through Excel Parking Services v. Hetherington-Jakeman, Mansfield County Court, March 2008. Please provide evidence defying The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1997 of financial loss as a consequence to the duration of time stated. The 11 minutes the vehicle exceeded would be respected as de minimus by court in a free car park which was not fully occupied. You as a company are unable to provide me with a contract to park on the land. You have no legal capacity to contract with me and therefore an enforcement of a parking charge which is exclusive to the landowner is dismissed. Parking Eye v. Somerfield [2012] EWCA Civ 1338. Waltham Forest v. Vine [CCRTF 98/1290/B2]

You have stated 'The signage, which is clearly displayed at the entrance to and throughout the car park, states that this is a private land, the car park is managed by ParkingEye Ltd, that the maximum free stay authorised is 1 hours and 30 minutes, along with other terms and conditions set out in the signage, the Parking Charge is now payable to ParkingEye Ltd (as the creditor).’ The signage in the Aldi car park in Middlesborough is inadequate and incompetent as they do not clearly state what the ANPR systems are used for. This is completely against and breaches B6.1 and 21.1 of The BPA code which states signs MUST inform drivers that ANPR is being used and the actions that can be done with that data. The signs in the car park are also of poor visibility which I will forward photos to prove. The first sign is yards from Marton Road in which the vehicle had no time to stop and read the poor information given. The sign does state that the maximum time a vehicle is allowed to be parked for is 1 hours and 30 minutes. The vehicle did enter the car park at 10:56:04 and did depart at 12:37:22 but this is no sufficient evidence that the vehicle was literally parked stationary for longer than 1 hours 30 minutes. Taking in to account the code of practice to an unfair commercial practice under the Consumer Regulations 2009, I appeal against the Parking Charge Notice issued by Parking Eye on 01/05/2014.

Yours faithfully
XXXX XXXXXXXX

Today, I received a letter saying from ParkingEye again:

You have stated that you were not the driver of the vehicle at the date and time of which the breach of the terms and conditions of the car park, but you have not indicated who was.

You have already been notified that under section 9(2)(b) of schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 that the driver of the motor vehicle is required to pay this parking charge in full. As we do not know the drivers name or current postal address, if you were the driver at the time, you should tell us the name and the current postal address.

You are warned that if, after 29 days from the date given (which is presumed to be the second working day after the Date Issued), the Parking Charge had not been paid in full and we do not know both the name and current address of the driver, we have the right to recover any unpaid part of the parking charge from you, the registered keeper. This warning is given to you under paragraph 9(2)(f) of schedule 4 of the Protection os Freedoms Act 2012 and is subject to our complying with the applicable conditions under schedule 4 of that act.

This Parking Charge has been placed on hold for 14 days in order for you to provide additional/further evidence.

Can anyone please tell me what to do? Do I have to state the driver? Will it make a difference if I declare the driver? What happens next?

Thanks

Coupon-mad

Please start your own thread. This has been covered before though, lots of times; they are not being truthful and they are breaching the BPA CoP. You need to prod them with a sharp stick for the POPLA code and tell them to sod off asking about the driver as you've reported them to the BPA for a Code of Practice breach. And do so.