Parking Eye Charge for overstay (10 mins) paid by cheque now demanding 100 pounds

kita1

On the 15th August my parents (in their 80's) parked at Morecambe behind the Pleasureland car park to go to the big boot sale. They paid for 1 hour and overstayed by approx. 10 mins. My father was sitting in the car the whole time.

They received a demand in the post, on either the 24th or 25th August, enclosing a photo of the car, the demand was to pay 60 pounds within 14 days or it would be 100 pounds. My father went and got a cheque from the bank (they don't own a cheque book or credit card) and sent it off in the post (first class) on the 26th August with his protestations that to charge 60 pounds for a 10 minute overstay seemed excessive. Today, September 4th, he has received a threatening letter demanding 100 pounds as the first 'charge' has not been payed.

He tried telephoning Parking Eye but could only get answering machines (which he does not like talking to!). The bank have confirmed that the cheque has not been cashed.

What is the best way to proceed? They don't want a lot of fuss, but are unsurprisingly reluctant to pay up.

This is the first parking 'ticket' they have ever received so they are very unused to dealing with anything like this.

Needless to say they are vowing never to go back to Morecambe!

I am not sure who owns the car park, but it is classed as 'private land' on the letter.

Any help/advice would be appreciated.

Ralph-y

Hi, and welcome ....

ok ...

first you / they ring the bank and stop the cheque !

next you / they need to read through the newbie thread

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4816822

this will explain why sending off the cheque was a bad idea and how to start to salvage the situation

they did not receive a 'parking ticket' in the normal sense ..... and before you even think of saying a fine :eek:

it is a speculative invoice ... nothing more nothing less.....

DO NOT IGNORE ..... parkinglie love to do court ....... however they can be beaten with something as simple as 2 appeals ...:D

read up and come back if you need more advice...

good luck

Ralph:cool:

ManxRed

Given that the letter received on the 24th/25th Aug would have given them (presumably) 14 days to pay at the discounted level, why on earth would they post a chaser on (presumably) the 2nd Sept (8 days later)??

Reason: You're dealing with a very disreputable company.

How long was the time given on the letter received on 24th/25th to submit an appeal?

Get an appeal in (on behalf of your father) quick. It doesn't matter that it'll be rejected, what you're looking to get is the opportunity to take it a stage further to the independent appeals body POPLA.

Dear Parking Eye,

Ref: Ticket reference

I wish to challenge the above ticket.

I am the registered keeper of vehicle 12XYZ 123.

My challenge is as follows:

1. Your charge does not represent a loss to either yourselves or the landowner. Even if you claim that it forms a commercial penalty as per Beavis v Parking Eye, then you will be fully aware that (a) the case is subject to appeal at the Supreme Court, and (b) even by the existing Court of Appeal judgement, the amount claimed must not be 'extravagant or unconscionable'. As similar penalties used as deterrence (e.g. the local Council) in the same location charge is considerably less than £100, then I put it to you that your charge IS 'extravagant and unconscionable' and is an unenforceable penalty.

2. I have reasonable belief that you have no legal standing on the land, and if you dispute this going forward then I will demand to see a full unredacted copy of your contract with the landowner.

Yours faithfully,

Etc...etc...

enfield_freddy

umm , forget the cheque , in fact let them cash it , hell they need the money with all those cases that are on hold!


if they do cash it , game over , accepted as full and final payment!

ampersand

Further, presence of Dad in car provided perfect opportunity for warden/pirate/bounty hunter to mitigate loss, by tapping on window, speaking to Dad ........no, of course he wouldn't, but is expected to, as here

BPA '. the operator must also be aware that they have a duty to mitigate their loss, ...'
#
Cancel that cheque, Dad.
Never phone a ppc or debt collector.

enfield_freddy

ampersand wrote: »

Further, presence of Dad in car provided perfect opportunity for warden/pirate/bounty hunter to mitigate loss, by tapping on window, speaking to Dad ........no, of course he wouldn't, but is expected to, as here

BPA '. the operator must also be aware that they have a duty to mitigate their loss, ...'
#
Cancel that cheque, Dad.
Never phone a ppc or debt collector.

it was an ANPR setup , no warden on site , however due to the time overstay , I would be asking if there was a grace period , and also pointing out the time it took to enter the car park and locate a bay , and the traffic congestion on the way out.


weren't PE caught out with those questions in a case at Fiscal beech , last year?

ampersand

Okay freddy - thought ' enclosing a photo of the car,' implied one only, therefore not an entry/exit set-up i.e. hand-held.

enfield_freddy

well I read


"On the 15th August my parents (in their 80's) parked at Morecambe behind the Pleasureland car park to go to the big boot sale. They paid for 1 hour and overstayed by approx. 10 mins. My father was sitting in the car the whole time.

They received a demand in the post, on either the 24th or 25th August, enclosing a photo of the car,


I would think the OP meant 2 photos one entering , and one leaving


that timing is ANPR style




and I stand by leaving the cheque active , if they "accidentally" cash it , game over

Northlakes

It is ANPR at this site. The previous operator was even more disreputable.

kita1

Thanks for the advice so far, will pass it on to my parents.

The photo was one of the car in situ (ie sitting in the parking place). The registration no. of the car was input into the ticket machine.

As far as I know there was only the one picture of the car in the parking space, no picture on exit/entrance.

There were plenty of vacant spaces in the car park at the time, so its not as if they were taking up a space that would have been in use.

enfield_freddy

kita1 wrote: »

Thanks for the advice so far, will pass it on to my parents.

The photo was one of the car in situ (ie sitting in the parking place). The registration no. of the car was input into the ticket machine.

As far as I know there was only the one picture of the car in the parking space, no picture on exit/entrance.

There were plenty of vacant spaces in the car park at the time, so its not as if they were taking up a space that would have been in use.

when the ANPR system was accepted by the government as part of thev POFa 2012 , is was set that a camera would record the entry , and the exit times and work the difference out , companies like PE have added the "typing in of reg No" as an "extra"


as they have failed to produce photographic evidence of the entry/exit times , they have not met the requirements of POFa 2012 , and as such cannot chase the owner , only the driver.


anyone else want to add to this?