Parking Eye PCN - Two Saints retail park, Ormskirk

Elysander

Fairacre appear to be the landowners, having paid circa £6.5 million for the site in 2015. There is a 'contact us' form on their website. No doubt you visit the shopping park with your family often, and you are astounded that you are now being threatened with court action - you and your family will take your custom elsewhere if this is the way that they treat customers! The landowner can instruct Parking Eye to cancel


http://www.fairacreproperty.co.uk/

Coupon-mad

didactosaurus wrote: »

Thanks, Coupon-mad. What prospects do I have in court with my defence as outlined above?

I've tried to phone Argos many times this week but no-one answers. I can't drive as I had an appendectomy last Tuesday, so I can't visit in person until next week at least.

I wasn't saying to ring Argos, not even HO:

the Retail Park site management

Google the place! Elysander has done it for you...

didactosaurus

Just emailed Fairacre - thanks, Elysander. We shall see.

didactosaurus

Also emailed Rosie Cooper MP.

Coupon-mad

didactosaurus wrote: »

Also emailed Rosie Cooper MP.

Jolly good - every single victim here should complain to their MP:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/72869191#Comment_72869191

didactosaurus

Reply rec'd from P Eye. Currently away till 11th so can't respond until then. Not sure whether anything has been posted to home as out of the country:

"Dear

---

Thank you for your correspondence received in relation to claim number

---

.

We recently sent you a Letter Before Action, which informed you that the above Parking Charge remains outstanding and had now been processed for further action. This is because your appeal to POPLA was unsuccessful and the independent adjudicator found in ParkingEye’s favour. You were advised in their appeal decision to pay the full Parking Charge in order to avoid further action.

ParkingEye can confirm that we are authorised by the ICO to collect and process data from the DVLA for the purpose of car park management. The ICO have also confirmed to ParkingEye that we are authorised to collect and process data by the means of our ANPR cameras.

ParkingEye complies fully with the Data Protection Act 1998. All personal data is processed fairly and lawfully and we satisfy 2 conditions of Schedule 2 of the said Act, those being:

1. The data subject has given his consent to the processing.
2. The processing is necessary—
(a) for the performance of a contract to which the data subject is a party

The signage at the car parks operated by ParkingEye gives a privacy notice to motorists that their registration details will be captured by Automatic Number Plate Recognition cameras.

“By entering this private car park, you consent for the purpose of parking control and enforcement of the Parking Contract to: the capturing of photographs of the vehicle and registration by the ANPR cameras and to the processing of this data, together with any data provided via the payment or permit systems, by ParkingEye Ltd to check compliance with the Parking Contract; and to the processing of this data to request registered keeper details from the DVLA.”

By entering and remaining on site, the motorist gave consent to the processing of their data by means of the ANPR cameras for the purpose of parking control and enforcement of the parking contract.

ParkingEye also satisfies one condition of Schedule 3 of the said Act, this being:

6. The processing—
(a) is necessary for the purpose of, or in connection with, any legal proceedings (including prospective legal proceedings),
(b) is necessary for the purpose of obtaining legal advice, or
(c) is otherwise necessary for the purposes of establishing, exercising or defending legal rights.

ParkingEye has fulfilled these criteria as data processing is necessary for the purpose of legally enforcing the breach of contract between ParkingEye and the Defendant, and is also necessary for exercising and defending our client’s legal rights.

ParkingEye operates a grace period on site to give motorists time to consider the terms and conditions in operation and decide whether they wish to bound by the same, before acting accordingly. This means that all motorists parking on site have a chance to read through the signage and the relevant terms and conditions, before agreeing to the parking contract being offered.

All signs on site that pertain to the general terms and conditions of parking contain text which explains that, “[…] by entering this private car park, you [each motorist] consent, for the purpose of car park management, to: the capturing of photographs of the vehicle and registration by the ANPR cameras […] and to the processing of this data […]”. In turn, consent is also provided so as to allow ParkingEye to make a request for registered keeper from the DVLA “where the Parking Contract is not adhered to”.

The wording used also clearly details that the Parking Contract in question commences when the motorist “enters” the car park and that the data from the ANPR system will be used to enable ParkingEye to take enforcement action against those who breach the parking terms and conditions in operation. The above means that the signage on site conveys in a reasonable, consistent and transparent manner that ANPR cameras are in use.

ParkingEye use Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) cameras and not CCTV cameras to monitor car parks. This technology captures and photographs vehicles entering and exiting the car park and compares this data to the maximum stay that vehicles are entitled to and, where applicable, any payment or permit that may relate to the registration captured.

ParkingEye’s Parking Charge Notice contains further detail of the Parking Event and also contains time stamped images of the vehicle entering and exiting the car park.

With regard to ParkingEye’s position as Claimant, we would like to bring to the court’s attention HHJ Moloney QC’s finding that ParkingEye was bringing the claim as principle. In other instances, when presented with ParkingEye’s contracts, District Judges have found that ParkingEye is bringing the claim as agent. In both instances, it has been found that ParkingEye has standing to bring the claim.

ParkingEye is authorised to install signage setting out the terms and conditions of parking, issue Parking Charges for a breach of these terms and conditions, and to recover and retain these charges. Please note that ParkingEye is presented as the contracting party on the signage. On the correspondence sent to the Defendant, and on the claim form, ParkingEye is identified as the creditor.
Ultimately, it is the Claimant’s position that ParkingEye can lawfully bring the claim whether we are viewed as principle or as agent.

Please note that you are now unable to lodge a further appeal, as the time to do so has passed, and we would advise you to follow the instructions provided with the claim form, wherein you may make payment or submit a defence.

Yours sincerely,

ParkingEye Enforcement Team
ParkingEye
Part of Capita Parking Services
40 Eaton Avenue | Matrix Park | Buckshaw Village | Chorley | PR7 7NA
Tel: 01772 450970 | Fax: 01772 450979 |

Registered in England and Wales, No: 5134454"

Elysander

Did you get a response from the landholder when you contacted them?

didactosaurus

No response at all from landholder 😕

didactosaurus

Have emailed landowner again. Difficult to chase up as I'm trying to enjoy a family holiday ��

didactosaurus

Have just arrived back in UK to find a claim form issued 31st July for £100 + £25 issue fee + £50 solicitors fee = £175.