stung by parkingeye

bcs2015

Thank you Coupon-mad, really appreciate your help. I have now submitted POPLA, appeal fingers crossed. will update the outcome.

Many thanks to all the forum members for their help in getting my appeal submitted.

bcs2015

Dear Forum members,

Many thanks for the help in drafting the appeal, further to which ParkingEye had provided all the requested information like site plan, planning permission and a system generated report showing payment taken from other machine on site during that period. I had replied back asking to furnish report from both the machines and also pointed out that there were no indication as to the location of pay machines and no proper instructions for making payment when the machine is faulty. Today I received an email from POPLA saying the decision has been made and it has been successful

Thanks again, without your help I would have ended up paying the PCN.

Verification Code

6060546364

DecisionSuccessful
Assessor NameAmi Edwards
Assessor summary of operator case
The operator has issued the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) on the basis the appellant exceeded the free stay and did not pay for the additional parking

Assessor summary of your case
The appellant states he returned to his vehicle after the two-hour free stay to pay for extra parking. However, the ticket machine would was not working correctly so he tried to call the operator but was unable to speak to an advisor.

Assessor supporting rational for decision
The operator has issued the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) on the basis the appellant exceeded the free stay and did not pay for the additional parking. The appellant states he returned to his vehicle after the two-hour free stay to pay for extra parking. However, the ticket machine would was not working correctly so he tried to call the operator but was unable to speak to an advisor. The appellant has provided evidence to support this. As the appellant has taken every reasonable step, he could to pay for his additional parking but was unable too, I must conclude the PCN was not issued correctly.

Umkomaas

Interesting that this has been successful more on mitigating circumstances than anything else, although 'frustration of contract' is probably the technical point if push came to shove - but I wouldn't have thought POPLA have heard of that one yet!

Guys_Dad

bcs2015 wrote: »

Dear Forum members,
Assessor supporting rational for decision
The operator has issued the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) on the basis the appellant exceeded the free stay and did not pay for the additional parking. The appellant states he returned to his vehicle after the two-hour free stay to pay for extra parking. However, the ticket machine would was not working correctly so he tried to call the operator but was unable to speak to an advisor. The appellant has provided evidence to support this. As the appellant has taken every reasonable step, he could to pay for his additional parking but was unable too, I must conclude the PCN was not issued correctly.

That is almost a milestone result! Even old POPLA would probably not accepted that mitigation. Great result, well done. :beer:

bcs2015

Thanks Guys, I honestly believe ParkingEye should provide alternate payment mechanism when the machines are out of order. What is the point of providing a phone number on the display board if its going to an automated message asking to provide PCN number when I am trying to pay for parking? ParkingEye had provided a text report showing they had taken payment on that day but that report did not indicate carpart, machine no, or car registration number, So I had requested to provide a proper report showing all these details and also the picture of car entering and leaving the carpark to prove that the machine and cameras were indeed working. Looks like they did not provide them, well in the end its a good result but a lesson learnt not to use car parks which offer initial free parking to trap customers.