ParkingEye £100 fine for 35min overpark Blackpool

Dee140157

That is a good one, as is the other parking eye appeal immediately linked to below that link.

Make sure you adapt to your own situation and put draft here if you want checking, adding your extra point.

jcbillington

Will do. I shall try and get my initial appeal in the post today, and I shall be back! Thanks to everyone who has helped so far.

jcbillington

One more thing...should I go back to the car park (parking somewhere else, obviously!) and check signage, charges etc?

EDIT: A friend has just sent me a photo of the tariffs. It costs £3.40 for 9 hours, £3.30 was paid - I am sure that £100 charge for 10p difference doesn't show GPEOL whilst it must be considered punitive, surely?!

nigelbb

Coupon-mad wrote: »

You have hit the nail on the head. If you read Schedule 4 paragraph 9 (linked in the NEWBIES thread under the first appeal template, a bit further down) you will see that a NTK has to state the amount of the parking charges which remain unpaid. PE Notices don't. No keeper liability then.

PE's argument would be that the parking charge which remains unpaid is £100. It's all down to the (deliberate) confusion between what the man in the street would regard as a charge for parking (Pay & Display fee) & the penalty charge that PPCs attempt to levy for breaches of their rules.

Dee140157

But yes, POPLA should consider it punitive.

Coupon-mad

nigelbb wrote: »

PE's argument would be that the parking charge which remains unpaid is £100. It's all down to the (deliberate) confusion between what the man in the street would regard as a charge for parking (Pay & Display fee) & the penalty charge that PPCs attempt to levy for breaches of their rules.

True, but PE's NTK to be transparent and in accordance with paragraph 9, should state how much of the 'parking charge' has been paid by the driver and how much remains unpaid (10p, plus arguably their PENALTY!). So still a flawed NTK as it doesn't state any of that, even if it said £3.30 was paid then it might be OK but it doesn't.

nigelbb

Coupon-mad wrote: »

True, but PE's NTK to be transparent and in accordance with paragraph 9, should state how much of the 'parking charge' has been paid by the driver and how much remains unpaid (10p, plus arguably their PENALTY!). So still a flawed NTK as it doesn't state any of that, even if it said £3.30 was paid then it might be OK but it doesn't.

Playing Devil's Advocate here PE's claim is that £100 is the only charge owing. They never deduct any part payment. That is of course yet another reason why the £100 charge is so obviously a penalty. Another indication that it's a penalty & not a GPEOL is that the same charge is levied however long the motorist overstayed whether it was 10 minutes or ten hours.

jcbillington

Got a letter today saying it was cancelled (on initial appeal) 'as a gesture of goodwill'! Thank you so much to everyone on here! Shall I post my variant of the letter here for reference?

Dee140157

Another "gesture of goodwill". There are a few rants on here lately about such gestures. Maybe PE are realising they lose all forum assisted appeals at POPLA, so are caving in earlier to save themselves £27 a time? So the goodwill is towards themselves not you!