Parking Eye - Letter Before County Court Claim

meanmrmustard

Thanks redx. The thread you sent me is an almost identical situation to mine. The person in question is a couple of stages ahead of me in the process so I intend to follow it closely.
And thank you Coupon, I will complain to the Manager at Morrison's, I have heard from similar threads that it doesn't necessarily do much good but it can't do me any harm to try. And yes, emailing PE from now on. Why should I waste the price of stamps on them?

meanmrmustard

Okay complaint to Morrison's CEO sent:

Dear Mr. Dalton Phillips,

PakingEye Reference No. xxx

I went shopping at Morrison’s on xxxx at xxxx. I have always preferred to use Morrison’s due to the excellent quality of fish and meat services over your competitors.

As a regular customer to Morrison’s I was shocked to receive a Parking Charge Notice from Parking Eye telling me that I have been charged £85 for overstaying in the carpark. I was confused as to how they had come up with this extortionate amount so I am appealing straight to yourself to review this case.

Although I don't still have the receipts, I do have my bank statements showing that I am a regular shopper to that particular store. Should you require sight of them I would be happy to send you copies.

I have been hounded by ParkingEye for several months now and they have gone as far as to threaten court proceedings against me! Had I known the situation I find myself in now I would never have chosen Morrison’s to do my shopping. I find it outrageous that a store of Morrison's size and excellent reputation can allow this blatant harassment of its customers to continue.

As a loyal customer of Morrison’s Supermarket I am disappointed that this is allowed to happen and I would appreciate it if the store could show discretion and cancel this Parking Charge. You will understand that I am reluctant to do my shopping at Morrison’s again until the charge has been cancelled.

As said, I would be grateful for your assistance in this matter.

Yours sincerely

xxxx

I am not expecting him to cancel the PCN but this is now about not giving in or taking no for an answer. If he does cancel it, that would be a bonus!

Now for the reply to PE's template letter....

Redx

excellent letter m8

exactly how it should be, I only wish more people would do the same to inform these companies how they are losing business and customer loyalty

my local morrissons has no parking restrictions and no PPC either

Umkomaas

Good letter. There's just one bit I'd change if you feel so inclined.

As a loyal customer of Morrison’s Supermarket I am disappointed that this is allowed to happen and I would appreciate it if the store could [STRIKE]show discretion and[/STRIKE] ask your agent - ParkingEye - to cancel this Parking Charge. You will understand that I am reluctant to do my shopping at Morrison’s again until the charge has been cancelled.

I wouldn't be asking them to 'show discretion' towards a regular and loyal customer - especially given the rate of knots at which they are currently losing them - they shouldn't be risking losing any more through the actions of an agent whose pursuit of its own profits inevitably impacts negatively on the profits of Morrisons and is therefore completely counter-productive. You might want to build words in to that effect.

Anyway, once again, good letter. Do come back and let us know how it goes.

Redx

should have done this months ago though

however, have a read of this as its similar but a different PPC, same supermarket

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5031520

GingerBob_3

meanmrmustard wrote: »

PE are certainly determined. I moved house late last year AND changed my vehicle...not because of this parking fine! :laugh:
They eventually found me at my new address and so the pestering continues!
I'm determined not to give in though. These companies are no different to the scum bag clampers.

Any idea how they tracked you down? PE is part of Capita plc, who will have enormous resources when it comes to personal/private data. Just wondering if there's been some data misuse here.

meanmrmustard

GingerBob they used a credit reference agency

Their exact words were:

ParkingEye has also sent you correspondence to the address contained on the original Parking Charge Notice on…. (3 separate dates)… these address details were provided by the DVLA. As no response was received after a number of letters were issued to this address, ParkingEye used a credit reference agency to ensure we had the correct address details for the registered keeper of the vehicle. In some cases the credit reference agency found that, according to their records, the registered keeper of this vehicle was residing at a new address.

GingerBob_3

meanmrmustard wrote: »

GingerBob they used a credit reference agency

Their exact words were:

ParkingEye has also sent you correspondence to the address contained on the original Parking Charge Notice on…. (3 separate dates)… these address details were provided by the DVLA. As no response was received after a number of letters were issued to this address, ParkingEye used a credit reference agency to ensure we had the correct address details for the registered keeper of the vehicle. In some cases the credit reference agency found that, according to their records, the registered keeper of this vehicle was residing at a new address.

My understanding of how CRAs operate is that they will interact with someone that has bought a debt off one of their members - a member being a financial institution that reports to them. I may stand corrected on this, but I didn't think they provided an address tracing facility to any Tom, !!!!!! or Harry. Having said that; it wouldn't surprise me if they did, since CRAs are at the same level of the food chain as PPCs (bottom feeders). I would welcome other views on this possible data protection issue. According to this, the PPCs (or is it just the one owned by Capita) have unfettered access to CRA data.

meanmrmustard

Just a quick question. I now live in Scotland and I hear the laws are slightly different here. Even though the case took place in England will this make any difference to my situation?

meanmrmustard

So here is my (drafted) reply to them lovely people at PE :rotfl:
I intend to email it rather than waste any more postage on them.

Please let me know if there is anything I should add and/or change. Thank you to Coupon for the excellent Sticky Thread - as you can see, I have used many parts of it.



Dear ParkingEye,

Reference: xxxx

Thank you for your letter dated xxxx.

To summarise:

I do not accept your position and would like to appeal the PCN on the grounds that the charge does not represent a Genuine Pre-Estimate of Loss. You therefore should either cancel the ticket or provide a POPLA code to enable the ADR process. POPLA is the parking industry’s recommended ADR and is still available.

If you do not issue me with a POPLA code, I would like to put you on Notice as to Costs. If the case reaches Court and the Judge orders POPLA, I will then claim costs for attending Court.

In reference to the letter addressed to me dated xxxx

You state in your letter:

“We believe our Letter Before County court claim is fully compliant with Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct...”

I am still not satisfied that your Letter Before Action is compliant and I find it utterly tiresome and a waste of my time that I am having to reiterate my previous letter to you.

Again I refer you to the Practice Direction. I am confused that as an ‘ordinary member of the public’ with no legal training whatsoever is repeatedly having to refer a ‘Trained Legal Team’ to basic pre-court actions.

Allow me to go through this with you step by step.

Annex A, Paragraph 2 of the Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct

http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/pd_pre-action_conduct

Accessed xxxx 2014:

2. Claimant’s letter before claim

2.1 The claimant’s letter should give concise details about the matter. This should enable the defendant to understand and investigate the issues without needing to request further information. The letter should include –

(1) the claimant’s full name and address; Provided

(2) the basis on which the claim is made (i.e. why the claimant says the defendant is liable); Partly provided but not accepted

(3) a clear summary of the facts on which the claim is based; Partly provided but not accepted

(4) what the claimant wants from the defendant; Provided and
(5) if financial loss is claimed, an explanation of how the amount has been calculated. Not provided. I do not accept that your letter explains to me how the amount of £85 has been calculated. I do not believe that the charge is a genuine pre-estimate of loss.Please show me how this sum has been calculated in your next letter. Until you do this, I will be unable to send you a formal response.

2.2 The letter should also –

(1) list the essential documents on which the claimant intends to rely; Not provided. Your original LBCCC stated that:

‘as Court Proceedings have not yet begun, and as no defence has yet been filed, it is impossible for ParkingEye to sate exactly the documents that will be relied upon in court.’

The whole purpose of the Practice Directionis to exchange information and documents BEFORE they start court action. To me this is a deliberate refusal to comply with the Practice Direction. I assume that you know WHICH documents you intend to rely on? If so then I would like a list of these - as I should have had in the original LBCCC. Again, if these are not provided to me then I am unable to send you a formal response.

(2) set out the form of ADR (if any) that the claimant considers the most suitable and invite the defendant to agree to this; Not Provided.

I do not accept that it is not possible to use POPLA as ADR at this stage. POPLA do not impose any deadline atall as to when their services can be used, so they are in fact the best possible form of ADR. I am inviting you to use POPLA as ADR and would like youto accept this method. If you refuse to consider POPLA as a form of ADR, Iwould like you to send me some evidence which supports your claim that there isa 28 day time limit for using POPLA. Until you do this, I will unfortunately be unable to give you a formal response to your letter before claim.

Here is my appeal, as already emailed to yourselves (with noreply). If this appeal is rejected then I would like a POPLA Code to take the matter further:

I decline your invitation to pay or name the driver, neither of which are required of me as the keeper of the vehicle. This is my appeal and all liability to your company is denied on the following basis:

A) The amount is neither a genuine tariff/fee for parking, nor is it based upon any genuine pre-estimate of loss to your company or the landowner.

You are not the landowner and do not have the standing to offer contracts to drivers nor to bring a claim in your own right.

C) Your signage was not sufficiently prominent nor clearly worded and consideration did not flow from both parties, so there was no contract formed. This is a non-negotiated and totally unexpected third party 'charge' foisted upon legitimate motorists who are not your customers and are not parties of equal bargaining power. Therefore ALL terms are required to be so prominent and the risk of a charge so transparent that the information in its entirety must have been seen/accepted by the driver. No reasonable person would have accepted such onerous parking terms and I contend the extortionate charge was not 'drawn to his attention in the most explicit way' (Lord Denning,Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking Ltd [1971] 2 QB 163, Court of Appeal): 'The customer is bound by those terms as long as they are sufficiently brought to his notice beforehand, but not otherwise. In {ticket cases of former times} the issue...was regarded as an offer by the company. That theory was, of course, afiction. No customer in a thousand ever read the conditions. In order to give sufficient notice, it would need to be printed in red ink with a red hand pointing to it - or something equally startling.'

As you have failed to create any enforceable contract I suggest that you cancel this unjustified 'ticket'. If not, under your Trade Body's current Code of Practice you must issue a rejection letter which, inorder to answer my appeal, must include:

1. The legal basis of your charge, which is not clear (i.e.breach, trespass or contractual fee?). As keeper, I cannot be expected to guess the basis of your allegation.

(i) if alleging breach of contract, please supply a breakdown of your alleged 'loss' and state the intention of your enforcement (i.e. deterrent or revenue?).

(ii) if alleging trespass, enclose evidence of the perpetrator, proof of the liquidated damages alleged and the calculation of this sum by the landholder.

(iii) if alleging 'contractual fee' I request a VAT invoiceby return and your explanation of how you can allow drivers to park 'in breach' for a fee when your client originally contracted you in order to disallow and deter - not allow and profit from - unauthorised parking. I contend this charge is merely a penalty which is not recoverable in contract law (as found by Mr Recorder Gibson QC in the case of Civil Enforcement v McCafferty 3YK50188(AP476) 21/2/2014 Appeal). Should you try to rely upon ParkingEye v Beavis & Wardley at independent appeal stage, I will of course point out that it was a flawed decision at small claim level so is not binding, and Mr Beavis is continuing his defence to the Court of Appeal. There is clearly no commercial justification for this punitive charge and no case law to support it.

2. Proof of your locus standi to offer contracts to drivers at this site and to bring a claim in your own right for this particular contravention. If you are not the landowner, I will need to see a copy of your contract, showing the restrictions, the charges, the dates and terms of business including any payments between yourself and your client and the definition of your status as agents or contractors and your assigned rights (if any). Such detail is necessary for me to make an informed decision. Failure to divulge your landowner contract (or heavily redacting it) will be deemed as withholding pertinent information and, of course, I will require it to be shown at independent appeal stage anyway. A witness statement will not suffice, nor a site agreement with a managing agent or other party who is not the landowner.

3. Your explanation of the consideration that you believe flowed from the driver, and from yourselves. Consideration from both sides is required for a contract.

4. A copy of the signage site map and close-up pictures ofthe signs in situ at the time, taken at a comparable time of day in similar light conditions.

5. The means to make an appeal to POPLA or the IAS. This must not be withheld or delayed, which would be a breach of the Code of Practice.

If you fail to simply cancel the charge or supply the means to independent appeal in your first reply you will also be reported to your applicable ATA and the DVLA. A certificate of posting will be obtained for all written communications for this appeal and complaint and I intend to claim my costs when I prevail.

I will now be complaining to your client about this ridiculous so-called 'parking charge' and about your whole set-up which does nothing to drive up standards in the parking industry, nor pays any regard to your client's purported customer service ethic. This is not an example of parking management, this is a covert practice which, to any reasonable person, might appear to be a business model akin to a protection racket on site. Your clients will be informed of our disgust at your entire business approach and your unwarranted threats. Despite your reliance upon impersonating 'PCNs' I am aware that you are no parking Authority, merely one of many from an industry known to make their profits by farming car parks and routinely emptying the pockets of customers of legitimate businesses. As I am sure you can tell, I am incensed by this harassment.

PRACTICE DIRECTION Para 2.2 (continued)

(3) state the date by which the claimant considers itreasonable for a full response to be provided by the defendant; Provided and

(4) identify and ask for copies of any relevant documents not in the claimant's possession and which the claimant wishes to see. Not Provided (seeabove)

2.3 Unless the defendant is known to be legally represented the letter should –

(1) refer the defendant to this Practice Direction and in particular draw attention to paragraph 4 concerning the court's powers to impose sanctions for failure to comply with the Practice Direction; Provided and

(2) inform the defendant that ignoring the letter before claim may lead to the claimant starting proceedings and may increase thedefendant's liability for costs. Provided

Finally I would like to thank you for highlighting the issue of CPR 17.1 - please note that I reserve the right to place your letter before the court in the event that you should seek to produce documents in breach of that rule.

So to conclude:

Please send me ALL the information as requested in line with the Practice Direction. Until this happens I am unable to provide a formal response.

Yours,