Park With Ease Fine

the_brod

Hi all,

Please advise. We received a Notice to Keeper letter from Park With Ease (19 days after parking). My partner appealed, didn't state she was driving. Park With Ease replied with their usual reply letter.

I appealed later that day, got a response saying '....replies can take up to 7 days....' After 8 days and no response I replied again and got a next day response with their usual reply.

I complained to stephen@parkwithease.co.uk as it said I could in their reply and he stated:-
"We received an appeal from someone claiming to be the driver on the day, this appeal was responded to on the 31st July at 11.57, as the driver admits liability by stating she parked at Ferry Meadows and forgot to make the payment this appeal is now closed, the driver has the right to an independent appeal through The IAS as was detailed in the rejection email." My partner was not driving at the time, they have assumed she was based on her wording. I have not admitted to driving the vehicle.

I have also complained to the place where we visited, Ferry Meadows in Peterborough. They have also replied, not giving much information apart from saying that the machine that was closest to our car "is a new machine which is waiting to be activated" I have been again (we're regular visitors and have paid every other time, parked in a different place on this occasion) since and the machine is still out of order waiting to be activated. This is 6 weeks after the initial incident.

What would people advise? We're at the IAS appeal stage, and from reading on here, that seems to be a waste of time. As they've incorrectly identified the driver based on an assumption in email wording should we ignore?

Thanks
Jon

waamo

As they've incorrectly identified the driver based on an assumption in email wording should we ignore?

That sounds like a good plan. Their assumption could be a massive hinderence if they attempt a court claim at any point.

Fruitcake

We could do to see the wording of the appeal/email in question (redacted of course) and subsequent correspondence to see if driver liability has been admitted. Simply saying "I parked ..." is enough to do it.

Other than that you are in ignore mode unless the scammers try court.

the_brod

This is her email appeal:-

"I have a letter stating I am to pay £25 as a parking charge for Sunday 2 July 2017. I have parked at ferry meadows many times and have always payed. On this one occasion I forgot. I feel to ask for £25 with no warning is extremely unfair. I ask that you look over our payment history and please drop the charge of £25. I am happy to pay the original charge."

waamo

Reading that it could well be written by a passenger.

Fruitcake

the_brod wrote: »

This is her email appeal:-

"I have a letter stating I am to pay £25 as a parking charge for Sunday 2 July 2017. I have parked at ferry meadows many times and have always payed. On this one occasion I forgot. I feel to ask for £25 with no warning is extremely unfair. I ask that you look over our payment history and please drop the charge of £25. I am happy to pay the original charge."

waamo wrote: »

Reading that it could well be written by a passenger.

On the balance of probabilities I would take that as revealing the driver's identity.

Admitted to parking and paying on previous occasions and then admitting they forgot to pay on this specific occasion implies it was the same process of I parked, but this time didn't pay.

the_brod

Thanks for replying.

Nothing there explicitly states she was driving, it's ambiguous. As they potentially have the wrong driver should we just ignore it? Or would you appeal to IAS or reply back to the appeal reply emails?

the_brod

Fruitcake wrote: »

On the balance of probabilities I would take that as revealing the driver's identity.

Admitted to parking and paying on previous occasions and then admitting they forgot to pay on this specific occasion implies it was the same process of I parked, but this time didn't pay.

But she wasn't driving though.....

Fruitcake

the_brod wrote: »

But she wasn't driving though.....

Sorry, I missed that bit. However it helps the keeper's case.

There is nothing you can do now except ignore unless the scammers try court.

the_brod

Ok, thanks both for your help. We'll sit tight and see what they do.....