Parkingeye Machine

Pcyuljr1

Good morning everybody,

I am hoping for some advice. I have read the Newbies post and despite the comment of;

'I have read the NEWBIES thread but cannot find anything specific to my case...my case is different''. A - NO IT ISN'T. YOU DO NOT NEED SPECIFICS. FORGET THE DETAIL, MOST CASES ARE ALL THE SAME.'

I do actually think mine is different, although happy to accept otherwise.

My rationale is;

- I do not dispute being the keeper of a vehicle that was parked in the car park
- I do not think the car park belonged to any individual shop/premises - it was a town centre car park in Wrexham
- I accept the vehicle was parked for 90 minutes without paying
- I accept the car park had signage and payment machines
- My PCN is not a Golden Ticket One
- Parkingeye have provided images of my vehicle arriving and departing (although none of the signs)

As such, a lot of the points in the default appeal letter do not seem to apply - or seem to be points already covered and I am wary that submitting an appeal on points not relevant may show in a bad light to a Judge in any future court issue.

My reasoning for appealing would be that the payment machine was not functioning as advertised. The card reader was not working and the wireless payment device did not work. A video was obtained of the driver attempting to make payment and showing the machine not processing the repeated attempted payments.

So my query is, is this a reason to appeal? Willing to pay. Wanted to pay. But couldn't pay due to the machine not functioning.

Parkingeye could argue that cash could have been used, but my understanding is that the driver did not have cash and had attended the car park due to the advertised option of paying either by card or by wireless payment - neither of which worked.

Will the video be the evidence that Parkingeye are likely to accept to dismiss the ticket do people think? As this would be the primary basis on which my appeal would be submitted.

Thanks for reading.

B789

Did you agree to their terms, which you say were obvious and plentiful on their signage, which state that you would be liable for a charge of £100, reduced to blah blah... if you contravened any of those terms? Was one of those terms that you had to pay for the period you were parked there? Do the terms state that if you do not agree with those terms that you should not park there?

The fact that their card reader was not functioning may be a moot point if there was an option to pay by cash or any other option to pay such as by app or phone/ Your initial appeal point mentioned above that the only reason you chose that car park was because of the advertised facility of paying by card is pretty weak if other methods were available and you decided on principle not to avail those other payment options.

I'm sure one of the legal experts will be along and advise more appropriately but I don't think you have much to go on except, maybe, frustration of contract or something else under the CRA2015.

Pcyuljr1

Thanks for the response.

Good point regarding the signage, I'm not sure the signage was read in that much depth by the driver and thus maybe I should follow the template and request they send me images of what exactly was agreed to?

I don't think the driver refused to pay by alternative methods for 'principle' reasons - they just didn't have cash and chose this car park as it allowed card payment methods (which then didn't work).

In relation to it being a 'weak appeal' - what would constitute a strong one? I assume that these companies don't send out invoices to people who have paid and have the ticket evidence? Surely all these appeals are because people didn't pay for the time used - it's just the rationale behind that reason that may different? I would have though being unable to pay due to malfunctioning equipment on behalf of the provider was a decent-ish reason?

B789

Pcyuljr1 said:

I assume that these companies don't send out invoices to people who have paid and have the ticket evidence? Surely all these appeals are because people didn't pay for the time used - it's just the rationale behind that reason that may different?

Don't you believe it. You can search and read any number of threads on here where Claims are made even though there is evidence of a ticket purchase.

The main reason we advocate using a full appeal/defence is that there is any number of points that can win and the PPC has to refute them all whereas the victim only has to win on one point. Have a look through the POPLA appeal thread to see how it works at that stage of the process.

You appear to only be at the initial appeal stage of this process and so we advise you to read, re-read and read again, the Newbies/FAQ thread to get a full understanding of the process you are now in. If you are able, make your initial appeal to PE. Hopefully, some of the other regulars will be along and provide some pointers to what you should put in your initial appeal to PE.

The frustration of contract may be one point, especially if you have video evidence. Of course you use the poor/lack of signage element although I believe that PE tend to be one of the better PPCs. However, as you mentioned, you did not read the terms, possibly because they were not prominent or obvious enough and so on. Also, I believe that PE issue PoFA compliant PCNs so not much to be gained from that tack.

Pcyuljr1

Thanks again. I think what confuses my simple brain is exactly what people are winning appeals on.

Is it because the parking company gives up (I.e can't be bothered)?

Is it because they are in the wrong (i.e. ticket was paid for)?

Is it because they made a simple mistake (i.e. wrong font on signage)?

As the template is so generic, I am wary as to how the appeals win - especially as mine is quite a simple case of driver wanted by to pay by two methods, both of which were advertised as options, neither of which worked.

I also wonder what 'gives' them the right to send out a PCN. Nothing on the invoice states who the land actually belongs to - just that it is private land.

I do want to contest it, after reading these threads - as if I just pay, they'll continue with their behaviour against the people who certainly have done nothing 'wrong' - however my brain works in a way that if I don't understand something, I struggle to believe in it - and the Newbie process is very much 'do this, don't ask why'.

I guess at the end of the day, I just don't want to be stood in front of a Judge who looks at me like an idiot and wonders why I didn't just pay the £60 'penalty' on behalf of the driver who I completely accept didn't buy a ticket.

Pcyuljr1

*I certainly do appreciate all comments though! It's all very interesting.

B789

You are dealing with an unregulated industry that has evolved from a bunch of ex-clampers and scammers. If you've spent any time reading through all the threads on here, there is very little consistency except for the fact that these PPCs thrive on abusing most victims' lack of knowledge about this process.

Ultimately, you are dealing with contract law which is not very high up in most people's life experiences. Also, as you will probably have noticed, a majority of these victims believe that they have received a "fine" rather than a speculative invoice for an alleged debt arising out of a breach of contract allegation.

What happens if these cases ever get in front of a judge is that the original claim, which by then has been inflated with spurious add-ons, and then they lose the claim, the final amount they are made to pay is almost always less than the amount claimed by the PPC because the spurious add-ons are not allowed, especially in a small claim. So, by contesting these claims all the way to court, any that are unsuccessful, are invariably for less than the original claim amount.

Another issue that plays into the hands of these scammers is the fact that many victims have no idea how the CCJ system works. Far too many are under the misapprehension that if a claim goes to court and they lose, or even if they are just issued a claim in many cases, they somehow have a stain on their credit record and will forever be doomed to a bad credit record. Of course, nothing could be further from the truth but the debt collection companies connected to these firms use that fear to get the uninitiated and the gullible to poop their pants at the first hint of court action and cough up the money.

It's a pity that more people don't understand the system and knew about the fact that even if you were to lose in a Claim and there is a CCJ against you, as long as it is paid within 30 days of issue, any record of it is expunged from their credit record. A CCJ only ever remains on your record for up to 6 years if it is ignore and left unpaid within 30 days.

Coupon-mad

I think your video could win it at POPLA.

Give it a go and don't use a template appeal.

Pcyuljr1

Thank you chaps (or ladies) - appreciate the time you've taken in at least reading my ramblings.

I'll give the appeal a go, even offering to pay (on behalf of the driver) for the ticket and hope the video swings it my way.

If not, or if they dispute it, I'm considering going down the route of asking them to disclose how many wireless or card transactions happened that day - obviously not personal details - just the number that happened at that machine. I think if they concede the machine was faulty, I'll be on stronger ground!

B789

Pcyuljr1 said:

Thank you chaps (or ladies) - appreciate the time you've taken in at least reading my ramblings.

I'll give the appeal a go, even offering to pay (on behalf of the driver) for the ticket and hope the video swings it my way.

If not, or if they dispute it, I'm considering going down the route of asking them to disclose how many wireless or card transactions happened that day - obviously not personal details - just the number that happened at that machine. I think if they concede the machine was faulty, I'll be on stronger ground!

NO, no, no no... You do NOT offer to pay these scammers. If you do, you are a part of the problem and will be tagged as a mug for future reference by them as another gullible eejit who forks out their money to fund their scam.

Please do not utter such sacrilegious words as "offer to pay" these scammers on here. Nobody anywhere on this forum has advised you to pay these scammers.

You seem to be under the assumption that these scammers will "concede" anything and will give you the information you want willy-nilly. You are in a process and need to understand what happens when, as explained in the Newbies/FAQ thread. If you lose your appeals (highly likely), the process is likely to eventually proceed to a Claim. That is when you will be able to get any evidence.

Until then, you don't fund these scammers. Just follow the process and receive an education/life experience of dealing with scammers who abuse contract law.

Coupon-mad

Seconded. No offering to pay.