Max Stay 0 hrs 0 mins

kernowrn

Dear amazing people of the forum,


With your help I've overturned a number of tickets in the past, mainly on GPEOL/lack of response but I've been more careful since 2015, with my last one being cancelled about 3 months after the Beavis case.


The driver of a vehicle I own has been caught out however, at a (closed) Starbucks car park with genuinely poor signage, especially in the dark, and what seems to me to be a wierd maximum stay policy (according to the NTK) of 0 hours and 0 mins (The driver only stayed 32 mins).

Is this likely to be an error? If not, is there any clause in particular I can use at appeal/POPLA? Or does it just enhance the GPEOL argument?

Does GPEOL still work like it used to? I see it has less emphasis in the resources now.

Many thanks,
kernowrn

waamo

GEOPL is now dead in the water. Poor signage is a good argument though. Use the template in the Newbies thread for your initial appeal.

System

Use the template in the Newbies thread for your initial appeal.

Good advice but it depends on the parking company. Which is it?

Coupon-mad

I have been caught out however, at a (closed) Starbucks car park with genuinely poor signage, especially in the dark, and what seems to me to be a wierd maximum stay policy (according to the NTK) of 0 hours and 0 mins (I only stayed 32 mins).

Is this likely to be an error?

No, not an error, this will be ParkingEye I guess?

It means when the shops are shut there is no parking licence - which is why you should win at POPLA, if it's a BPA member!

kernowrn

Thanks for your advice! It is indeed ParkingEye.



What is the argument to make to win with no parking license that should win at POPLA? I didn't see that in the Newbie notes/Template?


Thank you!

The_Deep

If there is no parking there is no contract to park. No contract, therefore there can be no breach of contract,

kernowrn

Hi, thanks for your help so far.

I've got my rejection letter from PE so I have my POPLA number.


I've had a search of the forum and can't find anything similar to my own (probably the fault of my own search skills). Do any of the experienced folk here know of any winning arguments I can rehash for 'no contract to park, therefore no breach of contract'?



Many thanks,

kernowrn

Apologies for the bump.
Thanks forumites.

The_Deep

Make life difficult for them, complain to your MP.

It is the will of Parliament that these scammers be put out of business. Hopefully that will take place in the near future. The Bill has passed through the HOC without hitch, and goes to the Lords soon. In the meantime involve your MP, the poor dears are buckling under the weight of complaints about these scammers. Read this one which I wrote earlier

This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of alleged contracts for alleged parking offences, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors. Is has been suggested by an MP that some of these companies may have connections to organised crime.

Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, (especially Smart}, and others have already been named and shamed in the House of Commons as have Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each week), hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned. They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

The problem has become so widespread that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers.

Sir Greg Knight's Private Members Bill to curb the excesses, and perhaps close down, some of these companies passed its Third Reading in late November, and, with a fair wind, will become Law next year.

All three readings are available to watch on the internet, (some 6-7 hours), and published in Hansard. MPs have an extremely low opinion of the industry. Many are complaining that they are becoming overwhelmed by complaints from members of the public. Add to their burden, complain in the most robust terms about the scammers.

kernowrn

I will do exactly this, thank you The Deep.


Are you aware of any winning cases of "No contract therefore no breach"? Or are you able to outline me the argument, such that I can go away and make it my own?


Many thanks,

The_Deep

Some of these may help

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/72110494#Comment_72110494

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2016/04/pcm-uk-signage-does-not-create-contract.html

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2016/11/es-parking-lose-spinningfields-case.html