Updated Success Settled, Myself Taking Parking Eye POPLA or Parking Site owner to court

Terry1931

Redx said:

Terry1931 said:

Redx said:

Nobody is going to receive a summons , it's not a criminal case and no magistrates are involved

It's a civil case , using MCOL via the CCBC , over a contract law issue , or some other civil law disagreement between the parties

Clearly WB are possibly Legally liable for the actions of their agents , but I doubt that parking Eye will be involved , unless you make them both jointly and severally liable under civil law

So definitely no summons , and MCOL limits the charges that you can claim , plus the total too

I dont know why you side track on the terms, the broad outline of the post is more important.

Welcome Break will get a nasty letter on their office doorstep, call it a summons or whatever......lets see how they like it.


How will Welcome Break defend themselves against my claim without involving Parking Eye

Terms are very important with your proposed plan of action , when it comes to the legal side of it , even though I already disagreed with it and told you so

So if you are going to do it , get the basics right and cut the fiction and untruths

No summons , and neither side pay the other , it's a mutually beneficial partnership

The MSA won't be the landowner , they will be a lessee , the government is the landowner probably the Department of Transport

OK but Welcome Break are the receivers of the Parking Charge, the Parking charge says the land is Private and managed by Parking Eye for Welcome break 

I have written to Welcome Break and they say that all matters are managed by PArking Eye and would not answer the question as to whom I should address to reclaim the PArking Charge, either Welcome Break Or PArking Eye

There has been much side discussion on this thread but nobody has really answered the Original Question.

I am preferring to name Welcome Break Holdings on my MCOL

Coupon-mad

OK but Welcome Break are the receivers of the Parking Charge, 

They aren't.

Terry1931

Coupon-mad said:

OK but Welcome Break are the receivers of the Parking Charge, 

They aren't.

Thats Not answering the question sorry

 is the MCOL addressed to Welcome Break or Parking Eye


But to clarify the other point which I dont really rquire anymore comment on.

There is a difference between the Parking Charge due at the site, and the Charge due for not paying the parking charge due at the site.

The Parking Charge due at the site is Paid for the service provided.

Welcome Break Charge £15 for any stay over 2hrs which you are invited to pay either in the services, at a machine or on the phone. At midnight the services were mostly closed and nobody had a clue, there were no payment machines and no telephone numbers to make payment.

Coupon-mad

I already answered your question ages back, and you thanked me.

If you are to sue WB you do need to know the facts and not think they pay ParkingEye or that the PCN comes to them.

Redx

It may be paid at the tills or using an app but that doesn't make them the recipient of the £15 , just an agent like issuing a lottery ticket for Camelot !

As I mentioned earlier , if you stick to facts , get the replies and digest them , you may get your answer , but it should be facts first , then the ball kicked all over the field until the leather is worn , then decide on your answer

My decision is that for an MSA both parties are jointly and severally liable , not just one , because each has a role in the whole shebang ( although WB won't comment on the contract , it is thought that the charges paid through the till or by an app are split 50/50 )

But the £100 PCN would go to PE or CP Plus , or the parking company if it's Group Nexus or similar

So kick the ball about some more before your decision your impatience is very high , take a chill pill !

Terry1931

Who said anything about payment by an APP

The  Signs Terms and conditions state payment may be made by phone.

Terry1931

Redx said:

It may be paid at the tills or using an app but that doesn't make them the recipient of the £15 , just an agent like issuing a lottery ticket for Camelot !

As I mentioned earlier , if you stick to facts , get the replies and digest them , you may get your answer , but it should be facts first , then the ball kicked all over the field until the leather is worn , then decide on your answer

My decision is that for an MSA both parties are jointly and severally liable , not just one , because each has a role in the whole shebang ( although WB won't comment on the contract , it is thought that the charges paid through the till or by an app are split 50/50 )

But the £100 PCN would go to PE or CP Plus , or the parking company if it's Group Nexus or similar

So kick the ball about some more before your decision your impatience is very high , take a chill pill !

Who said anything about payment by an APP

The  Signs Terms and conditions state payment may be made by phone.

Redx

You haven't shown us the signs or anything else !!   you are drip feeding information in retaliation !! Or making it up , so who is sidetracking now ? Payphone has been around for a while

WB sites tend to be pay at the tills or pay by phone ( or maybe an app , some MSA s use an app )

If you pay by phone ( or app )  , who are you paying the £15 to ??    WB or Parking Eye or a third party provider acting as a go between agent. ?

That is the real question here , because the answer you want may depend on it

But your £100 is definitely paid to Parking Eye , not WB , of that there is no argument at all

If you lost in a court claim , you would pay £185 to Parking Eye as the claimant , not WB

Facts , stick to facts

I already mentioned it's both as a minimum and am sticking to that as my answer

Terry1931

Redx said:

You haven't shown us the signs or anything else !!   you are drip feeding information in retaliation !! Or making it up , so who is sidetracking now ? Payphone has been around for a while

WB sites tend to be pay at the tills or pay by phone ( or maybe an app , some MSA s use an app )

If you pay by phone ( or app )  , who are you paying the £15 to ??    WB or Parking Eye or a third party provider acting as a go between agent. ?

That is the real question here , because the answer you want may depend on it

But your £100 is definitely paid to Parking Eye , not WB , of that there is no argument at all

If you lost in a court claim , you would pay £185 to Parking Eye as the claimant , not WB

Facts , stick to facts

I already mentioned it's both as a minimum and am sticking to that as my answer

I dont want to go into specifics of the case online. Including Pictures.

However the Signage says payment may be made Within the services, so as they were closed how would I know who takes the payment and issues the receipt and indeed received the money.

There was no mention of an APP, so don't assume that an app as their intended means of payment. payment by an app is deemed as payment ONLINE and not by Phone, payment by phone is telephone as per the phone number given to pay the Parking charge notice of £100

If their term and conditions meant by an APP they should say an APP not phone and that is a matter to be discussed in their defence. Which is not going to go down well.

To progress here we must discuss what would happen if Welcome Break were named on the MCOL but they denied being responsible and referring the claim be addressed to Parking Eye.

If I lost my MCOL I would not pay £185, why would I pay £185

I pay £100 to Parking eye to settle the PArking Charge, I then take out a MCOL claim for £85, which is the excess over the actual £15 parking fee due and to be paid had the services been open or there were payment machines or there was a Phone number to call and pay.

So all that i would lose is the MCOL Court fee, but worth it just to turn the tables on Welcome Break and Parking Eye

KeithP

Terry1931 said:

To progress here we must discuss what would happen if Welcome Break were named on the MCOL but they denied being responsible and referring the claim be addressed to Parking Eye.

If you name WB as the Defendant, then you will need to prove that the were responsible for... err... whatever it is you are accusing them of.

All WB have to do is say to you - prove it.

If you fail to do that, then your Claim ends there.

WB does not have to suggest that PE are a more appropriate Defendant.