Parking Eye - County Claim Form

hsadat

I'm going to send this off tonight guys so let me know if there is anything I could to make it bettter.

Thanks

Coupon-mad

That's an old version of that defence.

I edited it on 31st January to remove the waffle about Andre Agassi and plenty more that was superfluous, to stop people copying it:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/74254129#Comment_74254129

hsadat

Hello everyone

Following to submitting my defence, my court date is now due for 27th January 2020 which is less than 3 weeks away from now so I'm preparing to send off evidence for the court, hence I recently visited the site where I received the parking charge notice to take video and photo of the poor signage.

I also took photos of the reception area at which the manager approached me of what I'm doing. Anyways long story short, after I explained to her that Parking Eye is taking me to court even though a previous manager prior to her sent an email to cancel, in which PE refused, made the current manager very furious. The manager then sent them another email to immediately cancel to which Parking Eye once again refused however this time they are offering to settle for £60 rather than the £175 (which sounds fishy to me).

I have evidence of both email conversations the manager had with Parking Eye.

On top of that I received a letter today from Parking Eye along with documents they intend to use at court. In their letter they stated

"Please find enclosed the claimant's witness statement and supporting documents. The claimant will not be in attendance at the hearing to minimise costs that would then have to be sought from the other side. Attendance for the claimant will be through its agent from LPC law. We request that the matter be decided in the presence of our advocate from LPC Law, and confirm our agreement that the matter can be decided in the absence of the claimant."


What do you guys think I should do this from stage ? Settle or continue to ahead with the court hearing ?

Much Thanks

Hares

Redx

a good question that only you can answer

if you have a good strong case and can win in court , you can claim about £100 in costs , if you lost in court it could be around £175 and not £60 that is their offer to settle out of court

the hidden kepypad or Ipad and a new regime requiring extra signage , plus prominent signage required plus the attempted cancellations by the golf club managers seems that you have a strong case and they dont (so nothing like the BEAVIS case)

using LPC law is a usual tactic, they all use jobbing legal eagles all around the country , so the fact that PE are not attending is irrelevant to you


how strange that its taken 12 months !!!

Coupon-mad

I also took photos of the reception area at which the manager approached me of what I'm doing. Anyways long story short, after I explained to her that Parking Eye is taking me to court even though a previous manager prior to her sent an email to cancel, in which PE refused, made the current manager very furious. The manager then sent them another email to immediately cancel to which Parking Eye once again refused however this time they are offering to settle for £60 rather than the £175.

I would attend court but it is up to you! £60 is their usual cave-in offer when the landowner wants to cancel but it's late in the day, at court stage already.

It is possible P/Eye will discontinue the case if you don't cave.

Your strong hand is:

(a) - hiding the mechanism by which a driver can exempt their car, means the trader failed in its legal duty for transparency of terms, and thus this breaches the Consumer Rights Act 2015, Sch2 (the 'grey list' of terms that are likely to be unfair), which you need to put in evidence with your WS, with paras, 6, 10, 14 and 18 highlighted.

(b) - the emails from the landowner (BUT YOU CANNOT SHOW THE REPLY FROM PARKING EYE AS THAT INCLUDED AN OFFER, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, MEANING THAT EMAIL CANNOT BE SHOWN UNTIL IT COMES TO THE MATTER OF COSTS, AT THE END). However, the cancellation request emails from both managers and the initial refusal from P/Eye, if you can get a copy of that in writing, can be appended along with your photos, to your WS.

You then say in your WS and to the Judge, that these facts distinguish the case from ParkingEye v Beavis and there can be no legitimate interest excuse that can save this charge from falling foul of the 'penalty rule'. It is exactly the sort of charge that the Supreme Court had in mind when they held that the penalty rule begins as firmly 'engaged' in all parking charge cases, and each case must turn on its own facts and that the decision in Beavis was confirmed in a Supreme Court tweet in November 2015, to relate ONLY to Mr Beavis' local car park/those particular signs and that specific legitimate interest/commercial justification as discussed in that case only.