Help with Parking Eye Claim Form

Coupon-mad

Are you saying you started to read the 2nd post of the NEWBIES, all about how to win in court, and stopped reading, just because the first bit (of course) covers LBCCC stage?  Of course the first bit talks about LBCs, but the entire rest of it gives example defences, hearing tips, what happens when, why not to agree to Mediation, the lot!

This is why the  NEWBIES thread is there, to stop people posting saying they don't know what to do.  Please read the 2nd post properly.

AND - please now make a real difference - A TASK FOR SEPTEMBER.

The Government is (this month only) consulting about a new statutory code of practice (CoP) and framework to rein in the rogue parking firms.  Read and comment on the draft CoP proposal and the enforcement framework consultation, and get everyone you know to do the same.

You will need to register to comment on the CoP and enter an occupation even if you are retired or a homemaker, but otherwise it is easy to navigate, and comment upon each section/subsection individually. You can save comments to edit later and or submit comments once you are happy with them.

https://standardsdevelopment.bsigroup.com/projects/2020-00193#/section

You do not need to register to comment on the enforcement framework which can be found here. It has a link on page 5 to make comments.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/913272/Code_Enforcement_Framework_consultation.pdf

At the very least, we say the parking charge level should be £50/£25 or higher level £70/£35, as per Council PCNs in E&W.  

And we say the added fake 'debt recovery' costs are just double counting the cost of letters, and MUST GO because that is unfair and illegal.

Please be heard.  You can bet the hundreds of PPCs will be commenting.

No apologies for repeating this vital 'call for action' to consumers, on every thread this month!

AJW1066

RedX / Keith P - thanks for info it's very useful.

I'll triple check on the POFA front, as understand this is a loophole basically if they've not complied exactly. But ADR ? can't find anything in the list of acronyms or on a web search.... (Actual Driver Record?)

The gist of what I think you state is that I can fight it but if it goes to a court I'd likely lose, so
1. If I fight it, I assume there's a chance Parking Eye will not go to court as not worth cost/expense on their part?
2. If I fight, go to court and lose, I've seen suggestions that the current claim might not get awarded  in full (ignoring spurious court and legal fees they are already claiming), but do you know of instances where people have had to pay Parking Eye's additional court/legal costs as this might act as a disincentive to fight?

Many thanks

Coupon-mad

When I Googled ADR the second result is from Which? ''What is Alternative dispute resolution (ADR)?'' 

The gist of what I think you state is that I can fight it but if it goes to a court I'd likely lose, s

Really, why?

1. If I fight it, I assume there's a chance Parking Eye will not go to court as not worth cost/expense on their part?

No chance.
They issue a claim form, they continue to the hearing unless the landowner calls them off when you complain.

2. If I fight, go to court and lose, I've seen suggestions that the current claim might not get awarded  in full (ignoring spurious court and legal fees they are already claiming), but do you know of instances where people have had to pay Parking Eye's additional court/legal costs as this might act as a disincentive to fight?

No because this is small claims and people who lose pay £175 - £200, tops, all told, everything.


Please do the two consultations!
Nothing will change enough, unless the consumer call for lower parking charges is raucous.

AJW1066

Redx said:

The full claims process is discussed in that second post , plus some example defences  you can crib from
Google will answer acronym questions , plus the fifth post has acronym details
POFA is extremely relevant , because if they complied with POFA , plus if their signage is deemed adequate , plus if they have a valid landowner contract and authority , you have no case
The Beavis case put paid to the no loss argument a few years ago , plus private car parks were not free due to the pandemic , private land is exactly that
You need a legal argument that can win , or you lose like Beavis did

RedX - looked at my PCN in detail in relation to POFA, they don't seem to have done this

"Specify the outstanding amount of the parking charge and of the maximum additional costs they may seek to recover, and of the dispute resolution arrangements"

As no where can I see any reference to maximum additional costs. ....

Redx

They are probably claiming their £100 , any additional charges are legal costs plus the court fee , so allowed costs on top of the original £100 , so an additional £50 legal fee and £25 court costs

There are no extra charges

I am saying that a win for you needs a legal argument that wins , a judge is bound by the law , so you have to find one , finding it in POFA , or the landowner authority , or signage , certainly not what you originally posted which is rubbish and naive

Parking eye will continue to court , they can claim what they claimed , ADR was an easy find in Google and somebody else explained it anyway. Popla was the time to argue the case , you failed to do so , so now you have a greater uphill task

They took Barry Beavis to 3 courts , so they won't have a problem with taking your case to one court

They can use the balance of probabilities to say you were the driver , unless you can truthfully state that you were not the driver

If they complied with POFA , you as keeper are liable , they won't care who the driver was

Coupon-mad

As no where can I see any reference to maximum additional costs. ....

Because none are allowed. This is explained in the template defence, top of the forum.

D_P_Dance

PE's sign leave much to be desired, read this,

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

Nine times out of ten these tickets are scams, so consider complaining to your MP., it can cause the scammer extra costs, and in some cases, cancellation. 

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 later this year,

Just as the clampers were finally closed down, so hopefully will many of these companies, 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.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/8/contents/of these Private Parking Companies.

Redx

What is the alleged contravention that occurred ? Stated on the PCN ??

An overstay ? (How long ?) Or is it a pay and display car park ? Non payment ? , What ?

Show us pictures of the signs ?

If a Popla appeal had been tried you would have had evidence of signage , landowner authority etc and would know all this information that Is new to you at the moment , so better prepared to have either paid the £100 after popla or better prepared for court , if you had lost at popla

What did you expect Parking eye to do when you ignored popla and ignored their invoice requiring payment ??

It was obvious that they would follow it up with a court case and had 6 years to do so

Fruitcake

AJW1066 said:

Redx said:

The full claims process is discussed in that second post , plus some example defences  you can crib from
Google will answer acronym questions , plus the fifth post has acronym details
POFA is extremely relevant , because if they complied with POFA , plus if their signage is deemed adequate , plus if they have a valid landowner contract and authority , you have no case
The Beavis case put paid to the no loss argument a few years ago , plus private car parks were not free due to the pandemic , private land is exactly that
You need a legal argument that can win , or you lose like Beavis did

RedX - looked at my PCN in detail in relation to POFA, they don't seem to have done this

"Specify the outstanding amount of the parking charge and of the maximum additional costs they may seek to recover, and of the dispute resolution arrangements"

As no where can I see any reference to maximum additional costs. ....

I find it hard to believe the NTK didn't tell the keeper how much the scammers wanted, in other words, "the outstanding amount of the parking charge."
Can you tell us which parts of the PoFA say the words I have highlighted above please?
You were asked previously if you received a PoPLA code. Did the NTK really not mention PoPLA as your option for ADR? That sounds most odd.

Did the NTK arrive in time to make the keeper liable as per para 8 or 9 (most likely 9 for a Parking Lie NTK) of Schedule 4 of the PoFA? 

Parking Lie use two types of NTK: one is PoFA compliant and the other isn't. There is an example of the non-PoFA compliant version in the NEWBIES. Have you compared yours with that version?

AJW1066

Thanks again for the helpful advice, esp. from Redx and KeithP.  But just a quick comment - I did read the Newbies section before creating this thread, do try google searches and did read the bit about Parking Eye in the Newbies section but was still a bit baffled. (Maybe it's not as obvious as you think if you've lived and breathed this for some time.....).  Hence the request for help.....

But to answer some of the questions, with photos.

1.  Actual original PCN (redacted) to show time of entry and exit - it was an ANPR camera and I have not been ascertain what the grace period was (no notification anywhere) but car was there with engine running for 12mins

2. You would have to enter your details on the terminal inside the Church Hall.  But the doors to the hall were locked, and on the front door the sign read "Due to the latest Govt explicit advice and in line with Baptist Union recommendations, that Church groups should not meet,  we have made the decision to suspend all church activities until further notice.  This includes all Sunday Services and mid-week activities".  Hence you could not have gone in to access the terminal.

3. Photos of signs - there are in fact two sets of signs, one from Parking Eye and older, more faded looking ones presumably from the previous parking company (not taken down).  All are at about 2m in height, multiple signs