Potential loophole in ParkingEye appeal process

waamo

stoem wrote: »

It's your opinion. Others differ.

I would be extremely surprised if anyone other than yourself had a different opinion. I would say it's a fact.

Coupon-mad

stoem wrote: »

That said the main point of the appeal is a different and much stronger one and there's also the small matter of illegible and inadequate signage. Nevertheless it's quite satisfying to see these scammers insisting that appellants agree to clauses that are, in my opinion and experience, unenforceable in court.
It's not a stretch to say that the prescribed process limits an appellant's ability to defend the charge thoroughly.

Signage nor being clear is a potentially winning point. The appeals page and file limit, is not. You could always have posted a pile of stuff, snail mail, if you wanted to.

Trouble is with signage arguments (your real defence) this is ParkingEye, who won at the Supreme Court in P/Eye v Beavis in 2015, and the highest court in the land said their signs were clear and prominent (at one car park, mind).

The easiest way to get any P/Eye PCN cancelled, is landowner/retailer complaint.

MistyZ

Coupon-mad wrote: »

The easiest way to get any P/Eye PCN cancelled, is landowner/retailer complaint.

Has that been done OP? The time for that is now.

stoem

MistyZ wrote: »

Has that been done OP? The time for that is now.

That's not really what this thread is about but I appreciate the reply.

Yes, the keeper has been in touch with the retailer (landowner currently unknown) but the most likely reason for the charge getting cancelled is IMO that the cinema tickets that correspond to the time of the alleged offence are at hand and customers at the cinema are supposed to be eligible to park for free for up to 4 hours. The alleged offence lasted 2 hours 10 mins (time of the movie).

The_Deep

IMO you are tilting at windmills

PEs signs are rubbish, a well written defence attacking these signs should have them on the ropes, read this,

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5972164/parking-eye-signs-oxford-road-reading

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Nine times out of ten these tickets are scams, so consider complaining to your MP, it can cause the scammer extra costs and work, and has been known to get the charge cancelled.

Parliament is well aware of the MO of these private parking companies, many of whom are former clampers, and on 15th March 2019 a Bill was enacted to curb the excesses of these shysters. Codes of Practice are being drawn up, an independent appeals service will be set up, and access to the DVLA's date base more rigorously policed, persistent offenders denied access to the DVLA database and unable to operate.

Hopefully life will become impossible for the worst of these scammers, but until this is done you should still complain to your MP, citing the new legislation.

[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/8/contents/enacted[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]

Just as the clampers were finally closed down, so hopefully will many of these Private Parking Companies.[/FONT][/FONT]

DoaM

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Trouble is with signage arguments (your real defence) this is ParkingEye, who won at the Supreme Court in P/Eye v Beavis in 2015, and the highest court in the land said their signs were clear and prominent (at one car park, mind).

And that's the crux of it ... it is easy to beat PE on signage by simply including copies (photos) of actual signage at your car park versus signage at the Beavis car park - that would blow their Beavis case argument out of the water. The PE signs at my local Aldi car park are a joke - totally unreadable T&Cs.

stoem

Update: ParkingEye have cancelled the charge.

twhitehousescat

so , they have accepted that you were NOT illegally parked and they got it wrong , and they asked for your info from dvla etc etc ,,,,,,,, you gonna let it go at that ?

stoem

twhitehousescat wrote: »

so , they have accepted that you were NOT illegally parked and they got it wrong , and they asked for your info from dvla etc etc ,,,,,,,, you gonna let it go at that ?

I never parked there in the first place or even drove the car, I've simply been helping the registered keeper in this matter.

Computersaysno

stoem wrote: »

It's your opinion. Others differ.

Wow....a newbie who knows more than all the regulars on here.....


We all bow down.