barnet hospital - parkingeye court action

shal4

KeithP wrote: »

You don't get an acknowledgement of your acknowledgement.
Acknowledging acknowledgements could go on forever.

However, you can check on MCOL which should confirm the AoS has been done.

thanks, i just logged in. it is done.

shal4

nosferatu1001 wrote: »

I think it was fistral beach that decided waiting isn't parking

please can you explain meaning of fistral breach as i want to add it to my defence. i tried to google but no results came.

shal4

Hi All, I have lack of appointment evidence:

i contacted hospital staff and the nurse who does therapy for my son but they do not record exact time as to when patient reported for therapy.

so although i have evidence that i had appointment that morning, i do not have supporting details as to when we reached hospital.

also, we were late for appointment so exact appointment time given to us may work against us.

---

i have written to barnet MP and my local MP and also, going to get sign board pictures taken this weekend.

---

PALS has failed to respond even after 2 reminders over a week.

---

thanks a lot everyone

Umkomaas

shal4 wrote: »

please can you explain meaning of fistral breach as i want to add it to my defence. i tried to google but no results came.

It's this court case transcript #CS018 that might help you.

http://www.parking-prankster.com/case-law.html

shal4

Hi All,

I have got the terms and conditions of PE from POLA Appeal document: I have typed relevant text below from PE terms and conditions signage:

*PE is authorized by landowner to operate the private car park for and on its behalf. We are not responsible for car park surface, damage or loss to and from motor vehicles or general site safety. Parking is subject to the terms and conditions that apply are set within this notice (!!!8220;The Parking Contract!!!8221;). By parking, waiting, or otherwise remaining within this private car park, you agree to comply with these terms and conditions (the !!!8220;Parking Contract!!!8221;) and are authorized to park only if you follow these correctly, including making payment where directed !!!8230; and so on. If you fail to comply, you accept liability to pay the fee for unauthorised parking (the !!!8220;Parking Charge!!!8221;)
This Parking Contract shall form the entire agreement between the parties.
!!!8230;more text but irrelevant to our case!!!8230;

By entering this private car park, you consent, for the purpose of car park management to: capturing of photographs of vehicle and registration by APNR cameras and/or by the attendant and for sub-contractor to check compliance with the Parking Contract.
Furthermore, you consent to the processing of this data to request registered keeper details from DVLA, where the Parking Contract is not adhered to and a) enforcement is undertaken remotely via ANPR; or !!!8230;

Parking charges incurred: a) will be notified to the registered keeper by post, where ANPR system identifies non-compliance with the Parking Contract, !!!8230;

---

my queries - i mean following is not clear from their terms and conditions at all:

-what is parking contract - it is not at all clear from above?
-How can parking charge be issued for not parking - no description in above terms and conditions?
-can staying or waiting in car park be called parking?
-if PE is wrong, i wonder why POPLA upheld their parking charge when i clearly did not park?
-r they authorized to contact DVLA in my waiting case - as they have my consent to contact DVLA only if Parking Contract is violated??
-how I have violated Parking Contract - if i did not park?
-what is definition of parking charge - they have not described?
-how APNR identified non-compliance? !!!8211; what is definition of non-compliance - as PE set out no terms and conditions for waiting?
-what is definition of unauthorized parking - not clear from terms and conditions?
-no mention of whether waiting on remaining in car park authorized or not?

---

some defence queries please:
-can I have lot of words in defence document? !!!8211; or will it work for or against me?
Concise and succinct or wordy and detailed is the right approach?
is Evidence required at this stage?
please help asap folks... i have read through FAQs of newbie thread so i think i have done my homework... thanks in advance.

shal4

one more query on PE sign board information I typed in above reply:
-nothing mentioned about waiting? How much waiting authorized and how much not authorized.

---

secondly,

---

-also, what happens after 10 minutes grace period defined as:
Grace period
ParkingEye operates a grace period on all sites which gives the motorist time to enter a car park, park,
and establish whether or not they wish to be bound by the terms and conditions of parking.
There is a sufficient grace period in place at this site which is fully compliant with the BPA code of
practice. All grace periods in place are a minimum of 10 minutes or more in line with the BPA Code of Practice.
- grace period has not been mentioned in terms and conditions on car park area for reader to read. So that is not part of contract?

---

PE mentioned below in POPLA appeal document:
my query:
??i do not understand what they are trying to suggest? can below authority information be of any benefit to me as defender?

---

Authority
ParkingEye can confirm that the above site is on private land, is not council owned and that we have
written authority to operate and issue Parking Charge Notices at this site from the landowner (or
landowner!!!8217;s agent).
It must also be noted that any person who makes a contract in his own name without disclosing the
existence of a principal, or who, though disclosing the fact that he is acting as an agent on behalf of a
principal, renders himself personally liable on the contract, is entitled to enforce it against the other

contracting party. (Fairlie v Fenton (1870) LR 5 Exch 169). It follows that a lawful contract between
ParkingEye and the motorist will be enforceable by ParkingEye as a party to that contract.

The_Deep

This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of contracts for alleged parking offences, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors.

Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, and another company have already been named and shamed, as has Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each year). They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

Hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned.

The problem has become so rampant that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers. Watch the video of the Second Reading in the HofC recently.

http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41

and complain in the most robust terms to your MP. With a fair wind they will be out of business by Christmas.

shal4

The_Deep wrote: »

This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of contracts for alleged parking offences, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors.

Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, and another company have already been named and shamed, as has Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each year). They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

Hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned.

The problem has become so rampant that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers. Watch the video of the Second Reading in the HofC recently.

http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41

and complain in the most robust terms to your MP. With a fair wind they will be out of business by Christmas.

thanks... i have written to both MPs - barnet MP and my local MP. please do advise me on my particular case as much as you can. thanks :-)

Coupon-mad

PE mentioned below in POPLA appeal document:
my query:
i do not understand what they are trying to suggest? can below authority information be of any benefit to me as defender?

That's their standard wording.

Did they include a copy of the landowner authority?

shal4

shal4 wrote: »

Hi All,

I have got the terms and conditions of PE from POLA Appeal document: I have typed relevant text below from PE terms and conditions signage:

*PE is authorized by landowner to operate the private car park for and on its behalf. We are not responsible for car park surface, damage or loss to and from motor vehicles or general site safety. Parking is subject to the terms and conditions that apply are set within this notice (!!!8220;The Parking Contract!!!8221;). By parking, waiting, or otherwise remaining within this private car park, you agree to comply with these terms and conditions (the !!!8220;Parking Contract!!!8221;) and are authorized to park only if you follow these correctly, including making payment where directed !!!8230; and so on. If you fail to comply, you accept liability to pay the fee for unauthorised parking (the !!!8220;Parking Charge!!!8221;)
This Parking Contract shall form the entire agreement between the parties.
!!!8230;more text but irrelevant to our case!!!8230;

By entering this private car park, you consent, for the purpose of car park management to: capturing of photographs of vehicle and registration by APNR cameras and/or by the attendant and for sub-contractor to check compliance with the Parking Contract.
Furthermore, you consent to the processing of this data to request registered keeper details from DVLA, where the Parking Contract is not adhered to and a) enforcement is undertaken remotely via ANPR; or !!!8230;

Parking charges incurred: a) will be notified to the registered keeper by post, where ANPR system identifies non-compliance with the Parking Contract, !!!8230;

---

my queries - i mean following is not clear from their terms and conditions at all:

-what is parking contract - it is not at all clear from above?
-How can parking charge be issued for not parking - no description in above terms and conditions?
-can staying or waiting in car park be called parking?
-if PE is wrong, i wonder why POPLA upheld their parking charge when i clearly did not park?
-r they authorized to contact DVLA in my waiting case - as they have my consent to contact DVLA only if Parking Contract is violated??
-how I have violated Parking Contract - if i did not park?
-what is definition of parking charge - they have not described?
-how APNR identified non-compliance? !!!8211; what is definition of non-compliance - as PE set out no terms and conditions for waiting?
-what is definition of unauthorized parking - not clear from terms and conditions?
-no mention of whether waiting on remaining in car park authorized or not?

---

some defence queries please:
-can I have lot of words in defence document? !!!8211; or will it work for or against me?
Concise and succinct or wordy and detailed is the right approach?
is Evidence required at this stage?
please help asap folks... i have read through FAQs of newbie thread so i think i have done my homework... thanks in advance.

please can someone help me with my queries?