Parking Eye - Snowden Mountain Railway

The_Deep

I believe that parking at this village is a bit of a rip off, as is the cost of the railway.


Why do people in this country so often make "attractions" so unattractive?

LJJ

Just had a response back from my email to Heritage GB, - "As the car park is operated on our behalf by Parking Eye I am sorry that we cannot intervene and gain an amnesty on your behalf for your overstay" - no surprise there so............ POPLA appeal in the pipeline - wish me luck
(not feeling confident)

Umkomaas

You might want to fire one back at them to say that as PE are their agents, they, Heritage GB, are jointly and severally liable for the actions of their agent.

Tell them that to appeal to POPLA will take you considerable time to research and construct your appeal. They should be under no doubt that, in the likely event of your appeal being upheld at POPLA, you will pursue them through the small claims court for all your expenses incurred as a result of their disinclination to intervene on behalf of one of their customers. Are customers no longer important to them? Lay it on thick.

Sh|t is a two-way street in this game, and it gives them a problem to digest and have concern about when you prevail at POPLA.

See what their response is to that!

Coupon-mad

LJJ wrote: »

Just had a response back from my email to Heritage GB "As the car park is operated on our behalf by Parking Eye I am sorry that we cannot intervene and gain an amnesty on your behalf for your overstay" - no surprise there so...POPLA appeal in the pipeline - wish me luck (not feeling confident)

As well as Redx's points, you MUST include no keeper liability as one of your appeal points; that's the whole point of appealing as registered keeper.

Not sure why you only listed two above, hopefully you've searched the forum and found more examples to copy from. Also mention the Beavis case and the Aziz test (search the forum for those key words).

Castle

And don't forget ParkingEye v Cargius (it's the same car park, but refers to an underpayment rather than non payment).

LJJ

Not feeling very confident at the moment

I've had an email from PE, detailing the information they have sent to POPLA regarding my appeal - they enclosed a "witness statement" signed by the commercial manager of Heritage GB who own Snowden MR. It states that..
"The operator (PE) has written authority from the landholder to undertake parking management control and enforcement at the site, also had authority to issue a parking charge for the parking event dated 26th Aug 2015 under this written agreement"
"The operator is authorised to issue a parking charge notice for breach of the T & Cs" and "authorised to pursue the outstanding parking charges..."

Is it worth me requesting a copy of the "written agreement" from PE? or should I
hang fire until the Beavis decision tomorrow ?

Guys_Dad

Hang on for a few more hours and if Beavis wins, then GPEOL regains it's silver bullet status.

The_Deep

Indeed, GPEOL is still the key, there is no justification in charging a penalty to deter people from overstaying/parking there. They still have a MOUNTAIN to climb.

salmosalaris

If Beavis loses I would do a single point POPLA appeal on no keeper liability re "the unpaid charge on the day before the NtK was issued" ( i'm not suggesting you do this )
POPLA will have to start addressung some of these points soon
In the meantime cover your back , write to PE as the reg keeper and offer the tariff inadvertantly not paid by the driver due to an honest possible error

salmosalaris

Interesting e mail from the Principal admitting PE act on their behalf in that
A. They have every right to intervene
B. Difficult to see how PE have any right to sue in their name for a debt owing to their Principal . Do the signs still have Snowdon Mountain Railway in large font ?