advice on Parking eye at Telford bridge retail park

tashaminx

Is it relevant in this case to mention that the date of issue is different in two parts of the letter? Is this a mistake that's been made and can
I use it against them?

tashaminx

Ok slight issue to say before I try and get some sleep. Above I've gotten the details for Savills, and these are the same on the retail parks website, but from another poster and my own searching I've got the owners(or managers of the site?) as wilkinsonswilliams? http://www.wilkinsonwilliams.co.uk/properties#Telford-Bridge-Retail-Park

The_Deep

If there is a facility to pay for extra time then Beavis goes out of the window, there is no commercial justification for these penal charges, and PE would be in the wrong if they mention it. In any case the decision is being appealed.

Northlakes

Your getting some good advice in the posts but remember this is a process you have to go through to get these cancelled.

The NEWBIES thread has the simple letter to ParkingEye. There is no point in spending too much time on this except your first line you should state you were a genuine customer on the site and spent £xxxx. Copies of the receipts are attached.
This will hopefully bring in to play the genuine shopper clause in the contract (if one exists in this contract).

The same or very similar letter to the landowners agent.

If you are on Facebook warn all your friends about this site and others you will get to know about where shoppers get penalised for spending too much money and spending too much time getting retail therapy or doing necessities.

You have done some good research to get the details of the managing agents. Use this information to put the screws on them. Aberdeen Property Investors will not be happy if this site starts to have vacancies because punters avoid spending their money there. These sites can soon become loss makers if retailers start pulling out. The internet age doesn't need as many fancy shops.

tashaminx

I'm still confused as to
Whether I am
To contact Savills or Aberdeen Property investors, but on telfiord bridge's website it says Savills so I think I'm going with that. Or I suppose Savills are the site management and Aberdeen the owners, so do I contact both?

Northlakes

Excellent see what this brings but use 'cancel' rather than withdraw. But make sure you don't miss getting the appeal into PE on time (as the keeper!).

Aberdeen Property Fund are the landowners but Savills will be the managing agents I think.

If Savills don't play ball I can get to the manager of the Aberdeen Property Fund who won't take kindly to this problem.

tashaminx

And Parking eye template. As expressed above I am keeping it as is...But adding about the driver being a genuine patron and receipts attached. I just feel that if the wording is tweaked enough they won't just see it and write it off as someone using a template?!


Date 19/07/2015

Address:...........

Dear Sir/Madam

Re: PCN No. ...

I challenge this 'PCN' as keeper of the car, on these main grounds:

a). The sum is disproportionate, does not represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss, nor is it a core price term.

b) The sum is extravagant and unconscionable and cannot be justified.

c). There is no evidence that you have any interest in the land. I will complain to the landowner about your aggressive ticketing.

d). Your 'Notice' fails to comply with the POFA so there can be no keeper liability.

e). I believe that the signs were not seen/are ambiguous and the predominant purpose is to deter so there is no contract to pay this charge, which is a penalty.

The driver was a genuine patron of the property and copies of receipts are attached to show this.

Formal challenge
There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. You must either rely on the POFA 2012 or cancel the charge. I will only appeal further if you offer POPLA, the only independent ADR with a scrutiny panel and trained Assessors. The 'IAS' offered by IPC firms will not be used, for well-documented reasons.

''Drop hands'' offer
The charge is baseless but I realise that you may have nominal postage costs. Equally, I have incurred costs for responding to your junk mail dressed up to mimic a parking ticket. It is clear that my costs and yours, at this point, do not exceed £15 so this is a formal “drop hands” offer. I remind you of the duty to mitigate any loss, so withdraw the spurious charge within 35 days and I will not pursue you for my costs.

Breach of CCRs
I hereby give notice of withdrawal from this alleged 'contract' which was never properly offered nor expressly agreed. This 'contract' is cancelled and any obligations now end.

I have kept proof of submission of this appeal and look forward to your reply

tashaminx

Northlakes wrote: »

Excellent see what this brings but use 'cancel' rather than withdraw. But make sure you don't miss getting the appeal into PE on time (as the keeper!).

Aberdeen Property Fund are the landowners but Savills will be the managing agents I think.

If Savills don't play ball I can get to the manager of the Aberdeen Property Fund who won't take kindly to this problem.

Thank you, edited to say cancel and will start with Savills and send the appeal for PE today.

Northlakes

PE hate template appeals as they know the appellant is doing some research and will not just pay up and go away.

Your doing well with this.

tashaminx

I have seen other template letters that challenge the parking company to prove their losses are equal to the charge being requested, insisting strong g evidence be given to prove their losses. Also seen ones where the letter specifies that if they reject I will not continue any contact or pay any charges of a POPLA code isn't given. That sort of thing, I guess overall the other templates I've read are slightly more legally aggressive in nature. But it's been said above not to stray from the template so I won't unless anyone wants to suggest this is a good idea.