We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
POPLA Appeal - ParkingEye PCN 11 minutes "overstay"
Comments
-
I'm afraid it wasn't that obvious to me. But thank you for the explanations.Redx said:
Is it not obvious ??wiwan31 said:What would be the next step from here?
Either you pay parking eye £100 as the full default tariff to make it go away
Or you explain it to a judge , in court , and the judgment will either be in your favour of parking eye's favour
If Parking Eye win in court , you will pay approx £175 within the 30 days allowed to stop a CCJ affecting your credit rating
0 -
They'll only be interested if it's readable.wiwan31 said:
I'm sorry if I've offended you somehow. I was just posting the result of the appeal for reference, as I thought people that had contributed so far or that were going through a similar process might be interested.KeithP said:Is there anything in particular you want us to read in that slab of text you have thrown at us?
As posted, it is not readable.
I know that's how PoPLA sent it to you, but it is unreasonable to expect anyone here to be reading it, and maybe even looking to see if PoPLA have made mistakes in their assessment.
Help others to help you.2 -
You're probably right. Upon reading the appeal result I just healf-heartedly posted without thinking to reformat it. I'm sorry.KeithP said:
They'll only be interested if it's readable.wiwan31 said:
I'm sorry if I've offended you somehow. I was just posting the result of the appeal for reference, as I thought people that had contributed so far or that were going through a similar process might be interested.KeithP said:Is there anything in particular you want us to read in that slab of text you have thrown at us?
As posted, it is not readable.
I know that's how PoPLA sent it to you, but it is unreasonable to expect anyone here to be reading it, and maybe even looking to see if PoPLA have made mistakes in their assessment.
Help others to help you.
0 -
But popla told you to pay Parking Eye the £100 charge or face Courtwiwan31 said:
I'm afraid it wasn't that obvious to me. But thank you for the explanations.Redx said:
Is it not obvious ??wiwan31 said:What would be the next step from here?
Either you pay parking eye £100 as the full default tariff to make it go away
Or you explain it to a judge , in court , and the judgment will either be in your favour of parking eye's favour
If Parking Eye win in court , you will pay approx £175 within the 30 days allowed to stop a CCJ affecting your credit rating
As for the decision , you copied and pasted it , no paragraphs , no explanation by you on the losing points , yet expect people to read a great wall of babble with no context , no formatting , nothing
It was always the case that the PCN defaulted back to £100 from the discounted £60 , it's even on the signs back on pages 1 & 2
The vehicle overstayed the 4 hours , it was there for longer than was paid for , so underpayment or an overstay , popla decided that all the bases were covered by Parking Eye . I did tell you back on page 1 that your only chance was to win on a technicality at Popla
It seems you haven't absorbed any of the replies and opinions , grace periods was tried and failed , which was always on the cards ,signage and no landowner authority were wild cards with little chance of success in this case1
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.6K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.5K Spending & Discounts
- 247.5K Work, Benefits & Business
- 604.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.5K Life & Family
- 261.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards