Parkingeye exceeded paid for time limit

MotoristPaper

Hello, I was recently lucky enough to get a post PCN from ParkingEye. I paid for 4 hours and was 30 mins late leaving the car park due to being on a call at work. There is ANPR and I received a PCN through the post. I have read the Newbies thread and the template letter around inadequate signage, some colleagues have however suggested I need to mention that £100 is not comparable to the loss of the car park owner which would be around £1-2 for the the time exceeded.

I've also been advised that I should state that a Parking company cannot form a contract as they are not the landowners. Do I need to mention these in the initial appeal or is it fairly irrelavent as they will more than likely reject it and then drag out these pertinent points at the POPLA stage?

Cheers for any advice.

Fruitcake

Just send the BPA template in blue exactly as it appears in the NEWBIES. Save everything else for PoPLA.

Forget the loss point. That was scuppered by the Beavis case in the Supreme Court.

How soon after the alleged event did the NTK arrive, and does it have a bit saying something like, after 29 days ...?

Guys_Dad

Did your friend also say the earth was flat? Just about as accurate as what they have told you.

Not valid as they don't own the land??? Just what do you imagine this whole forum is about?

Take Fruitcake's initial advice and tell your friend to educate themselves by spending 30 minutes on here.

beamerguy

MotoristPaper wrote: »

Hello, I was recently lucky enough to get a post PCN from ParkingEye. I paid for 4 hours and was 30 mins late leaving the car park due to being on a call at work. There is ANPR and I received a PCN through the post. I have read the Newbies thread and the template letter around inadequate signage, some colleagues have however suggested I need to mention that £100 is not comparable to the loss of the car park owner which would be around £1-2 for the the time exceeded.

I've also been advised that I should state that a Parking company cannot form a contract as they are not the landowners. Do I need to mention these in the initial appeal or is it fairly irrelavent as they will more than likely reject it and then drag out these pertinent points at the POPLA stage?

Cheers for any advice.

With respect,your colleagues are talking out of the place the sun don't shine and you best put them the right before they lumber others with bad info

Forget the loss bit, that was sorted with Beavis v Parkingeye
in 2015 ,, parkingeye won !!

You need to do some homework to see if PE have permission
from the landlord/landowner

Do tell your colleagues to fully understand by looking at this
forum before making incorrect comments

The_Slithy_Tove

beamerguy wrote: »

Forget the loss bit, that was sorted with Beavis v Parkingeye
in 2015 ,, parkingeye won !!

Though PE vs Beavis did also state that pay-per-hour car parks are quite different from the Beavis case itself, and that a £100 charge for an overstay which would have cost, say, £1/hour, would be "perverse". So, be sure to use their own "winning" case against them.

MotoristPaper

Thank you for the advice, I will use the template. I received the PCN 8 days after the alleged event and it does indeed mention POFA and 29 days.

How would I go about finding if ParkingEye have permission from the landowner? I have googled ParkingEye and the car park name but can't find anything specific.

I will be sure to mention this to my colleagues, they are well meaning but I know one of them gave advice from a ticket from at least 5 years ago.

Cheers

Geoff1963

I've also been advised that . . .

To quote Wikipedia, "Citation required".

Redx

your colleagues know nothing about these matters !! period

you wont "see" any contract until the POPLA or court stage, and even then it may be redacted

to find landholder details, the only guaranteed way is to pay the LAND REGISTRY a few quid and they will tell you who the owner is (but you still wont get to see any contract with PE)

if you were to name the car park in question , and any other retailers (if any) that it serves , like a retail park for example, others on here may have come across it before

also search this forum using the drop down search box and suitable search words

this is a complicated topic , so you need to be a bit of a sherlock to understand it and deal with these matters

at least you are in the right place for good advice and help (for free)

Guys_Dad

Here are the facts. You used a car park. You overstayed. You got caught.

On the face of it, nowhere to run. Except here.

So you need help to find "get out clauses" to see if the PPC has tripped up.

Collectively, we have a shed load of experience and knowledge, so you need to trust the regulars with decent post counts.

OK.

Which car park?
Date of contravention?
Date on NTK?
Confirm you have written nothing back yet.

MotoristPaper

Hi, car park in question was bailey lane in Sheffield. Date of alleged offence was 31st July, NTK dated 4th August and received 8th August.

There are no shops served, ita a bit of concreted over land witha couple of dozen spaces.

Doing a search on here I found one successful appeal from 2014, the poster appealed on the grounds that she overstayed due to having to change her baby's oxygen tank. Parkingeye overturned it as it seems there was some equality act violations on their part.

Cheers.for.the continued and up to date advice

Coupon-mad

Don't read anything older than 2016/17 threads.

You don't want PE to show you they have landowner authority, in fact! You want to beat them by their omissions. Alleging 'no landowner authority' is a template standard POPLA appeal stage point, along with the others in the NEWBIES thread post #3, and it will be up to PE to contest your appeal then and prove it. And contest all other points you make, which are already in the NEWBIES thread, pre-written. Sometimes, they don't contest, sometimes they fail to evidence things.

We know what we are doing - forget the outdated stuff about ''no loss'' - you'd lose hands down at POPLA if you even whispered it in appeal, and you don't write about mitigating circumstances/being on call, either.

Does the PCN have a section on the back, about the POFA 2012 and the keeper and 29 days?