Does the Cargius case still stand

ShropshireL4d

Thanks for the advice, the last letter received from PE was after the appeal and again stating the Beavis case and giving us until the 7th July to pay up.
Should we sit tight or send them a counter argument on the Cargius case?

beamerguy

ShropshireL4d wrote: »

Thanks for the advice, the last letter received from PE was after the appeal and again stating the Beavis case and giving us until the 7th July to pay up.
Should we sit tight or send them a counter argument on the Cargius case?

This is how the Beavis case panned out
http://www.parkingcowboys.co.uk/parkingeye-vs-beavis/

You need to work out what is different in your case and if indeed
are parking eye correct in assuming you are similar to Beavis, or are they using Beavis as a scare tactic.

Beavis overstayed and then claimed the charge was unfair.

In most cases now, Beavis is not applicable and parking eye know that

Coupon-mad

Yes but people don't need that particular link...too much there on Parking Cowboys is out of date.

With ParkingEye, I encourage email tennis with the enforcement team, if court is threatened. Not ignoring them at all, no sitting ducks.

ShropshireL4d

My understanding is that Beavis overstayed the free parking period and the parking charge was deemed OK as it was the only revenue for the company who managed the car park.
In our case the business model for the car park management must be based on the hourly car park charges, as in Cargius. Therefore a £100 charge for not paying £1 must be a penalty charge.

Coupon-mad

Agreed - and in fact the comments of the Judges at Court of Appeal stage in the Beavis case, help your argument. Posts made by Salmosalaris a year ago, explain and quote from those Judges about 'transactional contracts' where any loss is easily quantifiable.

ShropshireL4d

How do I find the posts from Salmosalaris?

forgotmyname

Advanced search by username... Not a capital S it seems.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5389595

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/search.php?searchid=172892832

kidstaxi

ShropshireL4d - My understanding is that the owner is Marstons. Perhaps an email or message to them outlining the case, including your attempts at contacting the "Landlord" at the pub - plus the fact you had to resort to negative comments on Tripadvisor with yet again no response from the pub Landlord.

You may get a better result there, as Marstons would not like negative publicity (Have Marstons engaged the delightful parking comany themselves? If so, has Parking Eye infested all Marstons pubs?) Their website for queries is:-

http://www.marstons.co.uk/contact/

Cheers,

ShropshireL4d

Update since last post.
Realised I wrongly stated it was Parking Eye that is chasing us, it is actually Premier Parking.
Sent letter to PP stating Cargius case not Beavis case applies - no response.
No response from Marstons either.
Just received debt collection letter from DRP.
Contemplating sending £1 cheque to DRP (amount underpaid at car park) and reiterating the Cargius case. - Any comments on doing this?
Thanks in advance

Umkomaas

Any comments on doing this?

Yes - don't! It won't satisfy them and it can be construed that this is a tacit admission of liability. DRP charge £60 to chase alleged debt. They're not after a £1 parking day ticket, why do you think they'll settle for £1, they've spent more than that in contacting you?

Realised I wrongly stated it was Parking Eye that is chasing us, it is actually Premier Parking.

Well that's led to some potentially seriously wasted advice about POPLA. Even now you need to make it clearer as to who you are dealing with. There are 3 PPCs with very similar names:

1. Premier Park
2. Premier Parking Logistics
3. Premier Parking Solutions Ltd.

Each has different levels of litigiousness. If this does get to court, attention to detail will need to be in much sharper focus.