ParkingEye Email Bounce Back When Sending N180 DQ Form

Drive_110011

Hey! 

Thanks for all the information you've provided so far on so many threads! It has all been really useful in putting together my defence etc.

I've just been given the CNBC's N180 form to fill out and I have sent it back via email to their email address dq.cnbc@justice.gov.uk. As requested, I've cc'd in Parking Eye (the claimant) with the email address info@parkingeye.co.uk but the email has bounced back because they only allow emails from "senders in the same organisation or those added to the recipient's allowed senders list).

As I've attempted to send it to them, is that good enough or do I need to find another email address that works and resend it to them? If I do need to resend it to Parking Eye, do I also need to resend the email to CNBC (and cc in the new Parking Eye email address)? If I do need to resend it, does anyone have a Parking Eye email address that doesn't bounce back that is suitable for N180 forms to be sent to?

Thanks in advance.

Coupon-mad

Is this a ParkingEye in house claim? Not DCB Legal on their behalf?

If this is ParkingEye in-house why not use the email in post 2 of the NEWBIES thread?

Drive_110011

Hi Coupon-mad,

Thanks for such a quick reply! 

This is for ParkingEye in house. That would be too easy - doh silly me for missing that one specifically! Apologies - but thank you for the clarification.

I was confused when I got a bounce back from them because they don't accept emails from "outside of their organisation" despite being a company that is likely to receive 1000s of email complaints and court documents - perhaps that is why they do this!

Thanks again for all the help and so quick!

ChirpyChicken

It doesn't matter. Its only important you send it to the court 

Coupon-mad

DStev11 said:

Hi Coupon-mad,

Thanks for such a quick reply! 

This is for ParkingEye in house. That would be too easy - doh silly me for missing that one specifically! Apologies - but thank you for the clarification.

I was confused when I got a bounce back from them because they don't accept emails from "outside of their organisation" despite being a company that is likely to receive 1000s of email complaints and court documents - perhaps that is why they do this!

Thanks again for all the help and so quick!

Gentle nudge - only ten days or so left:

FIGHTBACK ALERT:

Please do the government's Public Consultation. We need every poster to complete this vital survey before the deadline next week.

See this thread:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6617396/parking-code-of-practice-consultation-now-extended-closes-friday-26th-september/p1

We understand that you may need some pointers. It looks laborious, we get that. It doesn't matter; no knowledge is needed except re your own experiences so you can call out a scam industry and you'll protect millions of motorists and help change the law. 

I've written some guidance to help focus new posters on the issues. I've covered almost every question, providing ideas if you agree with our stance on things like DRFs, which we say must be banned.

Ordinary people like you are falling victim to this scam 15 million times per annum. Motorists need your voice added please.

CLOSES ON FRIDAY 26th SEPTEMBER.

Drive_110011

Hi there,

I submitted my defence and have received my mediation date which is in a couple of weeks. 

I've received the Reply To Defence from ParkingEye (in-house) and the first paragraph of their response states:
"Initially, ParkingEye would highlight that this defence is a standard and generic template, distributed on online forums to Defendants attempting to avoid paying Parking Charges. ParkingEye has received a large number of identical or near-identical defences. All legal arguments are addressed at the end of the document, and will be referred to within our response when addressing each individual argument included in the Defendants' defence."

Is this how their replies usually start or is there anything to worry about when it comes to mediation/a court date (if not resolved at mediation)?

Thanks for all your help.

Gr1pr

Standard stuff,  ignore it 

Drive_110011

Gr1pr said:

Standard stuff,  ignore it 

Thank you so much for the quick response.

I really appreciate it. That's good news!

kryten3000

They all do this to try and make it look like you have no hope. The truth is most judges do not care, they’ll have seen many of these cases before and they’re rightly fed up with them. 

It seems fitting to me that a templated claim should be defended with a template. 

You are entitled to use whatever resources are available to you. The PPCs don’t like it because it is so effective.

Drive_110011

kryten3000 said:

They all do this to try and make it look like you have no hope. The truth is most judges do not care, they’ll have seen many of these cases before and they’re rightly fed up with them. 

It seems fitting to me that a templated claim should be defended with a template. 

You are entitled to use whatever resources are available to you. The PPCs don’t like it because it is so effective.

When putting it like that, it makes total sense!

Thanks very much for your help.

Car1980

All legal arguments are addressed at the end of the document, and will be referred to within our response when addressing each individual argument included in the Defendants' defence.

Could those arguments be a standard and generic template per chance? 

Prats.