London Aquatics Centre - Parking Eye - Urgent Defence

prowla

A question: does saying "I paid" identify you as the driver?

doubledotcom

If the Keeper was a passenger and they paid the tariff, that does not identify the driver. It will all depend on the actual grammar and wording used in the appeal. 

Can they infer that you were the driver if you said “I paid”? For a county court case, any ambiguous facts can be decided on the balance of probability.

The rule is simple… no “I did this or that”, only “the driver did this or that”.

Kaziyyah

UPDATE:
Hi everyone - hope you all had a good new year!

I sent my defence in November, and have just called the court to confirm that PE did not respond to proceed in the time frame given. This has resulted in the claim being 'stayed'.

From what I understand, this means the case is dormant until PE decide to revive it. Reviving it is probably unlikely so I guess I won...?

But... I am so frustrated because it could stay dormant for years and I do not get the satisfaction of a discontinuance, instead I have to live with a niggling feeling that they could revive it at any time they feel like it. Gosh they are pure evil to torture us normal people like this.

Any advice to make me feel better.....?

Coupon-mad

Kaziyyah said:

UPDATE:
Hi everyone - hope you all had a good new year!

I sent my defence in November, and have just called the court to confirm that PE did not respond to proceed in the time frame given. This has resulted in the claim being 'stayed'.

From what I understand, this means the case is dormant until PE decide to revive it. Reviving it is probably unlikely so I guess I won...?

But... I am so frustrated because it could stay dormant for years and I do not get the satisfaction of a discontinuance, instead I have to live with a niggling feeling that they could revive it at any time they feel like it. Gosh they are pure evil to torture us normal people like this.

I would warn you that yes, they could revive it at any time they feel like it.

They've accidentally let it slide - probably - due to lack of resources before Xmas to stay on top of all cases.

I would email the CNBC and cc in

enforcement@parkingeye.co.uk

to state that your address for service only remains good this year (2026) and you will not live indefinitely beholden to update their whereabouts - forever - to a member of the well-known unregulated (and considered rogue) parking industry.

As such, if ParkingEye apply to lift the stay, they must first offer the Government's impartial appeals service which will come in within months. And if the claimant proceeds to lift the stay any later than 2026, they must also do a CRA 'soft trace' first to check the Defendant's address first because the Defendant considers the case closed and will not live their life with this onerous burden hanging over them.

This email must be placed with the file - to be shown to the CNBC Judge if any application is made - and it is given in accordance with the Defendant's right to data accuracy and right to rectification and old data erasure.

ChirpyChicken

No given the way the DCB legal system works and its link within the bulk litigation system you should not assume that at all.
The way their system works which i won't bore people means this happens constantly . Some do fall through the net but November is nothing in the scheme of things and I would say you will see movement on the claim this month/next

Coupon-mad

I thought this one was PEye direct?

Castle

Coupon-mad said:

I thought this one was PEye direct?

It is as per the OP's reply at 7.27pm on 4th November 2025