Yet another scumbag parking eye letter - Fox House, Derby

usernamenotfound

Seem to be getting these every year now. I don't think they even bother putting signs up in some places and assume some people will blindly pay the ridiculous amounts asked for.
I'm just posting yet another appeal and eventual success to show people on this board that despite some naysayers, POPLA will still stick up for decent everyday motorists. (as long as you put the effort into altering the template to a sensible and relevant argument)
Stay tuned for my attachments and progress.

usernamenotfound

So far, I have already sent the "ONE SIZE FITS ALL TEMPLATE" to Parking eye's bullsht appeals website. As the FAQ suggests, this is in order to obtain a POPLA code from them only, and to ignore whatever else they send with it.

Coupon-mad

But we predict that you won't win at POPLA v ParkingEye...

Don't bother. Just complain to the retailer or landowner/agent

usernamenotfound

I have less of a chance complaining to a Derby housing developer that doesn't care about visitors in their parking spaces. But I will take some time to try I suppose, the only contact I have is their generic info@wavensmere.co.uk which will likely get bounced around for God knows how long until they finally tell me it's not their problem.

usernamenotfound

I also believe that Parking Eye will have absolutely no counter against my main argument - the fact there was no signage whatsoever in the parking area. If Parking Eye has no way to respond to this, they will not bother to dispute my POPLA appeal application, and I will win.

Coupon-mad

usernamenotfound said:

I also believe that Parking Eye will have absolutely no counter against my main argument - the fact there was no signage whatsoever in the parking area. If Parking Eye has no way to respond to this, they will not bother to dispute my POPLA appeal application, and I will win.

Yes if you have evidence photos, I agree.

But I've never in 18 years here, seen a ParkingEye site with zero signs, so it would be a first.

usernamenotfound

I have photo evidence, the signage is so sparse that all my photos have managed to capture the parking space at different angles, with no signage showing at all.

usernamenotfound

On a separate note, I am willing to fight this from the landowner angle, and have found two emails to send to: 
info@wavensmere.co.uk 
nightingale@carterssurveyors.co.uk
It's not clear which of these directly link to the landowner, perhaps none! But there's no harm in trying both.
See below my draft:

Dear Nightingale,

OFFICIAL COMPLAINT ABOUT PARKING EYE, AS AGENTS FOR FOX HOUSE

I am forced to make an official complaint to you because the actions of your agent, Parking Eye, are upsetting, intimidatory and will drive away genuine residents and visitors to your property. You can no doubt guess that we have received a letter purporting to mimic a 'parking ticket' from PE - and yet we knew nothing about any issues at the time when we stopped off at Fox House.

We had just been to visit a resident at Fox House, who had taken ill and asked for medicines and groceries to be collected and dropped at their apartment. We arrived, parked up in the car park, and immediately went to the apartment to deliver the items. It was midday and the car park was pretty much empty so we really didn't cause any loss of spaces to you nor PE and, more importantly, we saw no signs. I would suggest that they are unclear and/or not lit nor prominent enough to communicate any parking limitations.

But out of the blue we have now been sent a fake parking ticket by your agents with no indication to any contravention at all. We are now expected to have to explain our actions to a third party private company who we had no dealings with, no contract with, and who are demanding a lot of money from us - in my book that is totally unacceptable.

We are very upset and increasingly angry about this entire episode. After an enjoyable visit with our friend, our stop-off at Fox House has now left us feeling cheated. We are horrified that Nightingale can allow such a notorious firm to harass customers on your behalf. We had no idea about any parking limitations - or indeed any possibility of getting a 'parking ticket' - until as the registered keeper of the car, I was suddenly sent a demand by your agents.

I have researched the matter and intend to escalate my challenge against Parking Eye to the independent stage (Parking on Private Land Appeals). However, I am giving you the chance to quash the fake PCN once and for all because I feel you need to know that you and your agents are alienating genuine residents and visitors due to PE's zero-tolerance policy.

Well before renewing your contracts with Parking Eye when the time comes, might I just suggest you take time to read and digest the implications to other Retailers, Supermarkets & customers, and the picture painted of Parking Eye's aggressive business practices, as set out in the full court judgement for 'Parking Eye v Somerfield - Case No: A3/2011/0909'.

Notwithstanding what Parking Eye may well have to say on the matter, no doubt involving spin about their firm 'being members of the BPA Approved Operator Scheme' (in reality, merely trade body 'club membership' which enables them to buy registered keeper data and certainly does not 'regulate' their industry) I would also respectfully suggest that you should research the company you are associating with - in truth, Parking Eye have a terrible reputation countrywide and are now suing customers over minor 'infringements' without referral to their clients, like yourselves, who may still naively believe that their agenda is 'parking management'.

It seems that so many clients, blinded by the idea of 'parking management for free' have fallen for the spiel of a dominant company whose agenda is profit alone. It is not 'parking management' to have ANPR cameras on site and yet no management of spaces, no attendants and no checks made of disabled bays, for example. It's pure profiteering by your agent, routinely 'farming' car parks with no consideration for individual customer needs and circumstances.

My view is that ostensibly free ANPR-led enforcement of parking spaces by a notorious and litigious third party firm using remote cameras at the entrance and exit, and a few unnoticeable signs, is completely incompatible with customer service ethic. The UK Government has banned the use of ANPR cameras in council and local authority car parks because it is not fit for purpose, but unregulated parking scammers use them because their flaws generate money for them.

These were the exact words quoted by MPs in Parliament regarding the parking code of practice bill and these unregulated parking scammers:

''Rip-offs from car park Cowboys must stop''; unfair treatment; signage deliberately confusing to ensure a PCN is issued; ''years of abuse by rogue parking companies''; bloodsuckers; ''the current system of regulation is hopeless, like putting Dracula in charge of the blood-bank''; extortionate fines; rogue operators; ''sense of injustice''; unfair charges and notices; wilfully misleading; signage is a deliberate act to deceive or mislead; ''confusing signs are often deliberate, to trap innocent drivers''; unreasonable; a curse; harassing; operating in a disgusting way; appeals service is no guarantee of a fair hearing; loathed; outrageous scam; dodgy practice; outrageous abuse; unscrupulous practices; ''the British Parking Association is as much use as a multi-storey car park in the Gobi desert''; and finally, by way of unanimous conclusion: ''we need to crack down on these rogue companies. They are an absolute disgrace to this country. Ordinary motorists and ordinary residents should not have to put up with this''.

I would welcome your own view on this harassment and hope you see fit to ensure that PE cancel the 'ticket' forthwith. My research about this matter has revealed that you have cancelled some of these tickets before, which has helped to restore my faith a little, albeit tempered with frustration that such an aggressive agent is still being allowed to have free reign to intimidate customers for their own profit, at your (and your clients') own expense.

Sincerely,
...

usernamenotfound

They don't even bother stating the contravention or contract agreement! Is that even allowed, this template is so generic and full of holes.

[Image redacted for personal information by Forum Team]

ChirpyChicken

Dont spend to much time on this

Coupon-mad

Agreed. Give POPLA a whirl if you want (with dated photo evidence) but if you lose, ignore the letters unless you get a claim form.