Parking Eye claiming wrong reg was input in to the ticket machine.

charjool84

Hello, I am just after some advice in regards to a parking ticket we recieved on the 22nd June. We paid and displayed (have a copy of the ticket) and was parked up for 1 hr and 24 minutes before leaving (we paid for 2 hours) A week later we recieved a letter from parking eye demanding payment of £100 reduced to £60 if paid before 12th July.

We followed their appeals process on their website, provided them with a picture of our ticket and they replied on the 28th July stating that 'The signage located above the car park advises all motorists to enter their full, correct vehicle registration in to the payment machine when purchasing a ticket. It has come to our attention that the incorrect registration was input on the date of the parking event which has therefore resulted in a parking charge being issued'

It then goes on to say that... 'As a gesture of goodwill we would like to offer you the opportunity to make a discounted payment of £20.00. This will be on a without prejudice basis, however we must warn you that if this balance isnt repaid within 14 days from the date of this correspondence, the parking charge will increase to its origional value' The deadline is today (I totally forgot about it up until now)

Now, here is my query,

Can they actually make us pay when they havent provided us with any evidence to suggest it was inputted wrong, conscidering we are adamant that we did it correctly in to the machine. On the ticket it only provides us with the last 3 letters of our registration number. Can we contest this again. If so, how? As I dont want it to go up, again. Do I just pay it, even though I resent it concidering I feel we have done no wrong and it hasnt been proven otherwise?

The letter just says that if we pay this amount the matter will be closed and no further correspondence will be issued.

But, we paid, and I find this highly unfair.

Any help would be greatly appreciated. Many Thanks.

Redx

it is what it is , you could appeal and take it to popla , and subsequently to court

you could pay £10 and a SAR request to find out what was put into the machine , and could argue it out in front of a judge , you say the correct VRM was put in , they say not and so you broke the rules on the signage, then a judge decides

depends how far you want to take it and if you have the stamina for a fight that you may well lose

I would not be surprised at all if they are right and you are wrong about the key entry

it really is your decision to make , but its a common mistake that costs people dear

charjool84

Thank you for your reply.

I will begrudginly pay this then. £20 is better than £100. I was just 100% sure I entered it correctly. I even remember reciting it and checking over it when doing it.:(
Never mind.

Thanks again

Redx

their photos will show the VRM in and out of the car park , their payment machine will show the VRM entered by the driver , if the 2 dont match a ticket is issued

we could say that the machine should not allow any VRM to be input into it that doesnt match up with the anpr , preventing incorrect key entry at the P.O.S. but that is yet another well discussed argument out there in the media

the fact is they wont want due diligence checks at the P.O.S. as it would cut down their profits when drivers no longer make mistakes

ie:- they want people to fail the rules, so they can hit them with a large bill

they dont even monitor parking as its not about parking , its about hoping people will fail some rules and can be charged with an invoice for breaking the rules, including correct key entry

they want people to fail as they get more money from people who make mistakes, even if they think they havent made any at all

in theory , to win in court you would have had to be filming a video of the key entry made at the time and produce it as evidence of correct key entry, with a photo of the reg plates on the vehicle to back it up

ie:- fight fire with fire , sadly we dont film ourselves doing this despite everyone owning a mobile phone

charjool84

I might actually start filming myself from now on then.

Ive just rang up to pay this fine of the reduced fee (£20) but it said my outstanding balance was £40

My anger levels have just gone up even more.

Letter was dated 28th of July, today is the 11th. So by my calculation that is 14 days to pay at the reduced amount as stated on their letter?

The_Slithy_Tove

Clearly you're witnessing and beginning to understand the extent of their scam, and the depths to which they'll stoop. Do not fund the continuation of that scam.

charjool84

I certainly am.

What a complete and utter shambles.

I am not paying £40 when they clearly offered to accept £20 within 14 days. Also, I cant even see why the balance is now £40 conscidering the letter stated it would go up to the origional amount and £40 wasnt even that? Where have they even got that figure?

The_Deep

Why not let them take you to court, where it will be the word of a disreputable scammer against a fine upstanding member of the public.

With a bit of luck you may even make them cough up for the insult.

Umkomaas

Why not let them take you to court, where it will be the word of a disreputable scammer against a fine upstanding member of the public.

Do you mean a bit like that ParkingEye -v- Barry Beavis case? OK, got that one!

arabesque_101

I would put a cheque in the mail to them if you want to settle the matter for £20

rdr

charjool84 wrote: »

.... On the ticket it only provides us with the last 3 letters of our registration number. ...

What possible justification is there for this? It is a system designed to trip users up.
As I see it entering the number can serve 3 purposes:

1. Allowing them to match payments and apr, so they can run the car park remotely
2. preventing the transfer of partly used tickets
3. providing a revenue stream from human error

printing the partial number only aids 3)

I read

charjool84 wrote: »

It has come to our attention that the incorrect registration was input on the date of the parking event which has therefore resulted in a parking charge being issued'

as an admission that there was an unmatched payment for a number very close to the OP's, so the PPC knows that the OP paid and the "offence" is purely making a typo. I bet it was one of thise ABC keyboards too.
A £60 payment for a typo does seem a little unreasonable. It is possible for the ppc to prevent this error - but that would not be in their interests.
An interesting and winnable court case, possibly, but over £20 - it depends how brave and angry you are.