Parkingeye Home Bargains Pwllheli

GelatoMan

Received a court letter today acknowledging the Defence and stating that the Claimant has 28 days to respond in the absence of a response the case will be Stayed.

GelatoMan

I have received ParkingEye's Directions Questionnaire (N180) saying nothing other than they agree to Small Claims Mediation and Determination without a hearing.

Do I need to take any action, sorry if this has been covered elsewhere.

Thank you 
David 

GelatoMan

I have just found the answer and basically I wait until I receive my own form and then complete it.

GelatoMan

So everything filed on time and the case has been assigned to my local court in Caernarfon.

I have received a 45 page reply to my defence summary as follows:

1. Legal Basis Parkingeye v Beavis [2015].....
2. Basis of the Contract - Signage 
3. Is it enforceable Parkingeye v Beavis [2015] again 
4. Is the amount reasonable? Supreme Court and BPA support this level of charge
5. Does the contract breach consumer law on the basis of unfair contract terms?  Parkingeye v Beavis [2015] again and Aziz v Caixa d'Estalvis de Catalunya Tarragona I Manresa (Case C-415/11) [2013] 3 CMLR 89
6. Parkingeye as a Claimant - HHJ Moloney QC 
BPA approved code of practice 
Right to act as agent with authorisation letter 
Parkingeye v Sommerfeld Stores (2011)
Teheran-Europe Co Ltd v ST Belton (Tractors) Ltd (No1)[1968]
7. If the registered keeper is the driver
8. Conclusion 
It is Parkingeye's position that the Supreme Court Judgment provides vital clarity for motorists and the Parking Industry, as well as delivering a binding precedent to support the value and legal enforceability of our Parking Charges. In addition, whilst accepting that each case turns upon its own facts, it should be noted that Parkingeye is a member of the British Parking Association and Approved Operator Scheme. This means that we are a member of a well regulated industry, and conform to the relevant requirements and regulations

Then a signed statement from Owen Ford of Parkingeye Ltd stating his claim.

Followed by case detail 
Photos of my car, letters, signage plan, copies of signs and a redacted contract between Home Bargains and Parkingeye.

Any thoughts or advice would be greatly appreciated I feel a little intimidated if I'm honest 

Thank you 
David 

KeithP

GelatoMan said:

...it should be noted that Parkingeye is a member of the British Parking Association and Approved Operator Scheme. This means that we are a member of a well regulated industry, and conform to the relevant requirements and regulations.

Those two sentences made me smile.

Coupon-mad

LOL, don't let that template intimidate you!

GelatoMan

Thank you guys.

So basically just wait for a court date or for a withdrawal?

David 

Gr1pr

That local court will write a court order with copies posted to both of you, in due course ( but could be a long wait. )

Keep following the 12 steps 

GelatoMan

So I've looked at the Beavis Signs and the ones in Home Bargains don't look much different other than the colour. Should I be worried?

Gr1pr

Depends on the judge on the day and if PE have all their ducks in order or not, same as in the Beavis case, if it gets to an actual hearing in court , because they will trot out the Beavis case 

Perhaps its your friend who should be worried about paying the £195 if you lose in court. ? ( The friend who told you to ignore it ?  )

Court is Judge Bingo on the day, but the Supreme Court ruling makes these cases harder to win , especially for overstays, plus Parking Eye litigation are doing this in house, not farmed out to a 3rd party lawyer where they are less likely to get a win

I hope that you find the one chink in their armour ( but your anecdotal descriptions worry me the more you find out )