only entered last 3 letters of registration need help with legal appeal

robathandr

I recently entered a private car park run by Parking Eye in Liverpool centre and because I had never come across this type of payment before I asked someone who was also buying a ticket what you had to do to get the ticket . He pointed to the signs and said I had to enter on a keyboard the last 3 letters of my registration then pay the money which is what I did - £1.50 for 1 hour as I was picking up my wife from a cinema visit. After about 40 minutes I realised that the cinema show was going to finish a bit later than I originally thought so I went back to pay for another hour to make sure I was covered for time.
Approximately 10 days later I received a Parking Charge Notice with a fine for £100 for failing to make the appropriate payment for parking time. There are no phone numbers but I appealed on-line to be told I had not entered the full registration but only the last 3 letters and therefore was liable for a fine of £100 or £60 if paid with 14 days but as a 'gesture of goodwill' they would accept £20. I appealed again saying that if they checked they could easily see that I had not exceed my time and had paid the appropriate fee - the car park is only a small open air one and at most there. were 15 cars in the car park and in the time between me paying for the first and second tickets only one other car had gone into the car park . I was then told by the parking company that their internal appeals were finished and I could only appeal to POPLA , a so called independent appeals company. I sent an appeal to them explaining all that had happened only for my appeal to be rejected on the basis that the tickets I paid for were invalid because I had only put in the last 3 letters of the registration and therefore by parking with an invalid ticket I was breaking their terms and conditions and was liable to a fine of £100..
I feel that a fine of £100 is in fairness out of all proportion for what is an honest mistake but one in which I did not fail to pay any fees which were due for the duration of my parking. Also I would have thought that as the ticket issued to me is invalid then I feel that the ticket should be cancelled as the issue of such a ticket would seem to be an unlawful action.
Having started my appeals to both Parking Eye and POPLA under the impression that fairness and common sense would be sufficient I now realise that an argument on more of a legal basis is going to be required in order to take this further and I would appreciate any help or information that could be of benefit if this ends up in court.

Fruitcake

What happened when you complained to the landowner/cinema manager?

There is nothing else you can do now except wait to see if Parking Lie issue court papers. Unfortunately they are very likely to do so.

Also unfortunately you shot yourself in the foot by revealing the driver's identity, and not appealing to PoPLA on legal grounds.

You therefore need to start collecting evidence such as pictures of the car park entrance and signage there and around the car park in case they decide to take you to court.

Redx

hi

I watched your video and read the online details too

at the moment you are at stalemate

shame you didnt get help from us earlier, but now its clear you know the score, but to be clear oin this , its not magistrates court you will be taken to , its your local civil court at your local county court

read post #2 of the NEWBIES sticky thread, as that deals with both LBC stage and also MCOL stage too

especially read the BARGEPOLE posts

and read up on other similar cases that parking prankster has blogged about, with VRM entry and ticket machine woes

like http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/07/excel-lose-in-court.html

and

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/02/excel-lose-peel-centre-casemotorist-not.html

in an ideal world , the ticket machines would compare what is put in against the VRM they captured on entry , and maybe give a list of possibles, like a doctors surgery when you sign in near reception

but the private parking industry deliberately set people up to fail , so its important to know what these arguments are , plus the fact they accpeted your money so accpeted your new contract based on what you did enter

its complicated , we know, so read up on all similar cases (not just court cases) so you have the ability to fight back when you get an LBC or an MCOL in the post

@ fruitcake

I dont thik SEEL st car park has anything to do with the cinema, thats a side issue and doesnt really matter why he was there or who he was waiting for or where they were

the word NEARBY would suffice

robathandr

what about the fact that I was charged £1.50 and received a ticket that is invalid and so completely worthless - isn't that against the sale of goods act in some way ?

Guys_Dad

You won't win with PPCs or their trade associations who will support them unless they really drop a clanger.

But in a real court there is every chance that you might get a more reasonable judge (no guarantee though).

A very good point would be that the system should not dispense tickets that would not be valid in the UK.

Now 3 digits are valid (ST1 for example) but 3 letters? I don't think so. At least the system should ask for confirmation if registration is correct.

nosferatu1001

They'll claim their contract lets them charge you. Utterly crazy of course. A simple mistake like that should not result in a massive penalty

And it is a penalty. For sure. BEAVIS assists the defendant here.

Redx

as detailed in this case here

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/02/excel-lose-peel-centre-casemotorist-not.html

it was a strong point used by that defendant

and the fact the parking company got their pound of flesh and were not defrauded in any way

I seem to remember another one where the argument was that the PPC had accepted payment and therefore accepted the new contract based on the information fed into the machine

cant remember the legal terms or if it was again at the peel centre, as people fail on there daily

as mentioned above, its a "penalty" (because the actual parking charge was paid , in cash) for a driver not jumping through all the traps set by the PPC , WHEREAS IF THEY EMPLOYED SOMEBODY TO PUT IN THE DETAILS AND TAKE THE MONEY they wouldnt have this problm

in this day and age , the ticket machines should be linked to the cameras and only allow correct details, or offer the nearest match and ask if it is the correct VRM before accepting the money

wealdroam

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4788348/Pensioner-s-100-car-park-fine-despite-paying-CORRECT-fee.html

Redx

and the echo version with video

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/pensioners-fury-after-being-hit-13470669

[Deleted User]

I'd argue no breach of contract as the 3 letters were sufficient to

I. uniquely identify your vehicle
II to prevent the transfer of tickets between vehicles.
III to "marry up" the list of players with registrations of cars entering at that time

Does the signage say full registration or just registration was required?

There is no financial loss at all, so this is clearly a penalty. The issue of unconscionable charge could bite (distinguishing Beavis) on the basis that parking eye will need to go to court and admit no parking error, no financial loss, but still seek £100.

It's disproportionate (in terms of penalty, legal cost and court resource). So I'd like to see it go to trial

Coupon-mad

Also discussed here, where I had a bit of a rant on your behalf:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/72985734#Comment_72985734

Blame Lord Cheeseburger and co., for their terrible decision in 2015, which was in a case nothing like yours, but PE use the Beavis case EVERY TIME, anyway, to railroad POPLA (bet they did?!).

Complain to your MP.

If you get a small claim, don't write your own defence. Come back and we will help you.