IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Parking eye fine for entering a carpark for 14 minutes

Options
2

Comments

  • The_Slithy_Tove
    The_Slithy_Tove Posts: 4,096 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    itsdayv wrote: »
    Hiya,
    ... filling out the POPLA form, or should I just write the same info as in my appeal to parking eye?
    God, no, that will surely fail. You have to hit them with many, many points, and one of which could kill their claim. Search here for POPLA appeal points. I'm sure someone will be along soon with loads of links to relevan threads. Here's one to be going along with:
    https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4739845
  • Kite2010
    Kite2010 Posts: 4,308 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Home Insurance Hacker! Car Insurance Carver!
    Parking Eye throwing another £30 down the drain to POPLA for hopefully another successful appeal
  • Coupon-mad
    Coupon-mad Posts: 151,379 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    itsdayv wrote: »
    Hiya,

    I sent off the appeal to Parking Eye and they denied my appeal and sent a POPLA code. Just wondered if you had any advice for filling out the POPLA form, or should I just write the same info as in my appeal to parking eye?

    Thanks

    Dave




    Absolutely not the same appeal as before!

    Read the links & advice here and come up with a draft appeal like these winners:

    https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/62180281#Comment_62180281

    And also complain in writing to the Church, why not! After all the vicar nicely warned you to move and you did. What more could you have done and why if the Church allowing this extortion onsite?
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
    CLICK at the top or bottom of any page where it says:
     Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
  • itsdayv
    itsdayv Posts: 9 Forumite
    [FONT=&quot]Thank you, I have copueid my appeal below. Could you have a read and let me know if i am on the right track? i appreciate any help I can get. :)
    [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]
    [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]I am the owner of the vehicle related to the parking charge notice number xxxx/xxxxxxx received from ParkingEye.[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]The Parking Charge Notice relates to the vehicle in question pulling into the carpark at Holy Trinity Church, Newquay to consult a map as it was not safe to pull over at the side of the road. [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]At 08.34.52 on 26/07/13 the vehicle entered the carpark. No passengers left the vehicle whilst consulting the map and taking advice on directions. Shortly after pulling in, a vicar approached the vehicle to and advised that cameras on the entrance of the carpark would issue an automatic penalty if the vehicle remained. At this point, the vehicle left the (empty) carpark, at 08.49.02.[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]The vehicle was in carpark for 14 minutes and nobody left the vehicle.[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]I have researched the matter, taken legal advice and would like to point out the following as my appeal against said charge:[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]GRACE PERIOD[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]The BPA Code of Practice states that the driver should be allowed a reasonable grace period, and I would contend that in this case, a period of 15 minutes grace would not be unreasonable. I am aware that ParkingEye have other car parks which do have a grace period of 15 minutes, so this would seem to be a period which they themselves deem to be reasonable.[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]The Penalty of £100 for a stop of 14 minutes would seem to be going against the principle of allowing reasonable grace.[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]CONTRACT WITH THE LANDOWNER - NOT COMPLIANT WITH THE BPA CODE OF PRACTICE AND/OR NO LEGAL STATUS TO OFFER PARKING OR ENFORCE CHARGES[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]ParkingEye does not appear to own this car park and are assumed to be merely agents for the owner or legal occupier. In their Notice and in the rejection letters, ParkingEye has not provided me with any evidence that it is lawfully entitled to demand money from a driver or keeper, since they do not own nor have any interest or assignment of title of the land in question.[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]I require ParkingEye to provide a full copy of the actual contemporaneous, signed & dated contract with the landowner. [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]Contracts are complicated things, so a witness statement signed by someone is not good enough, neither is a statement that a person has seen it. A copy of the original showing the points above is the only acceptable items as evidence that a contract exists and authorises ParkingEye the right, under contract to write numerous letters to an appellant chasing monies without taking them to Court, to pursue parking charges in their own name, to retain any monies received from appellants and to pursue them through to Court.[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]I say that any contract is not compliant with the requirements set out in the BPA Code of Practice.[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]I do not believe that ParkingEye has the necessary legal capacity to enter into a contract with a driver of a vehicle parking in the car park, or indeed the legal standing to allege a breach of contract. I refer the Adjudicator to the recent Appeal Court decision in the case of Vehicle Control Services (VCS) v HMRC ( EWCA Civ 186 [2013]): The principal issue in this case was to determine the actual nature of Private Parking Charges. It was stated that: "If those charges are consideration for a supply of goods or services, they will be subject to VAT. If, on the other hand, they are damages they will not be." The ruling of the Court was that "I would hold, therefore, that the monies that VCS collected from motorists by enforcement of parking charges were not consideration moving from the landowner in return for the supply of parking services." In other words, they are not, as ParkingEye asserts, a contractual term. If they were a contractual term, ParkingEye would have to provide a VAT invoice, to provide a means of payment at the point of supply, and to account to HMRC for the VAT element of the charge. The Appellant asserts that these requirements have not been met. It must therefore be concluded that ParkingEye’s charges are in fact damages, or penalties, for which the Operator must demonstrate his actual, or pre-estimated, losses, as set out above.[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]USE OF ANPR and DATA COLLATION[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]I further contend that ParkingEye has failed to show me any evidence that the cameras in this car park comply with the requirements of the BPA Code of Practice part 21 (ANPR) and would require them to provide documented compliance to this section of the Code in its entirety.[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]This evidence must show documentary proof of contemporaneous manual checks, maintenance, calibration and full compliance with section 21 of the Code, in its evidence. [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]I also challenge ParkingEye to show that DPA registration (data collecting CCTV) is also complaint with legal and BPA requirements and demand that they demonstrate adherence.[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]NO CONTRACT WITH THE DRIVER[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]There is no contract between PCC and the driver, but even if there was a contract then it is unfair as defined in the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. So the requirements of forming a contract such as a meeting of minds, agreement, certainty of terms, etc, were not satisfied.[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]UNFAIR TERMS[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]The charge that was levied is an unfair term (and therefore not binding) pursuant to the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. In particular, Schedule 2 of those Regulations gives an indicative (and non-exhaustive) list of terms which may be regarded as unfair and includes at Schedule 2(1)(e) "Terms which have the object or effect of requiring any consumer who fails to fulfil his obligation to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation." Furthermore, Regulation 5(1) states that: "A contractual term which has not been individually negotiated shall be regarded as unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer" and 5(2) states: "A term shall always be regarded as not having been individually negotiated where it has been drafted in advance and the consumer has therefore not been able to influence the substance of the term."[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]UNREASONABLE[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]The charge that was levied is an unreasonable indemnity clause pursuant to section 4(1) of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 which provides that: "A person cannot by reference to any contract term be made to indemnify another person (whether a party to the contract or not) in respect of liability that may be incurred by the other for negligence or breach of contract, except in so far as the contract term satisfies the requirement of reasonableness.”[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]NO BREACH OF CONTRACT AND NO GENUINE PRE-ESTIMATE OF LOSS[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]There was no parking charge levied, the car park is “free” for 2 hours. On the date of the claimed loss, the carpark was entirely empty. There can have been no loss arising from the visit of less than 15 minutes. Neither can ParkingEye lawfully include their operational day-to-day running costs in enforcing parking restrictions at the site (for example, by erecting signage and employing administration staff) in any 'loss' claimed. This does not represent a loss resulting from a breach of the alleged parking contract. In other words, were no breach to have occurred, the cost of parking enforcement would still have been the same. This has been quoted by PoPLA itself in adjucation.[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]I contend there can be no loss shown whatsoever; no pre-estimate (prior to starting to 'charge for breaches' at this site) has been prepared or considered in advance.[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]The charge that was levied is punitive and therefore void (i.e. unenforceable) against me. The initial charge is arbitrary and in no way proportionate to any alleged breach of contract. This is all the more so for the additional charges which operator states accrues after 28 days of non-payment. This would also apply to any mentioned costs incurred through debt recovery unless it followed a court order. I would question that if a charge can be discounted by 40% by early payment that it is unreasonable to begin with.[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]UNLAWFUL PENALTY CHARGE[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]Since there was no demonstrable loss/damage, this'charge' is an attempt at extorting an unlawful charge to impersonate a parking ticket. This is similar to the decisions in several County Court cases such as Excel Parking Services v Hetherington-Jakeman (2008), also OBServices v Thurlow (review, February 2011), Parking Eye v Smith (Manchester County Court December 2011) and UKCPS v Murphy (April 2012) . [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]The operator is either charging for losses or it is a penalty/fine.[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]The operator could state the letter as an invoice or request for monies, but chooses to use the wording “PARKING CHARGE NOTICE” in an attempt to be deemed an official parking fine similar to what the Police and Council Wardens issue.[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]SUMMARY[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]On the basis of all the points I have raised, this 'charge' fails to meet the standards set out in paragraph 19 of the BPA CoP and also fails to comply with basic contract law.[/FONT]
  • itsdayv
    itsdayv Posts: 9 Forumite
    Hi everyone, just wondered if anyone had a chance to read through this?

    much appreciated!
  • xxchaosxx
    xxchaosxx Posts: 5 Forumite
    That letter is perfect, can not fault it in anyway my friend!

    You have pointed out ALL relevant points, have given very good examples of cases that are again relevant to yours.

    Let us know when you get a reply :)
  • nigelbb
    nigelbb Posts: 3,819 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    edited 3 September 2013 at 12:38PM
    There are some typos e.g. isnot carpark

    If the car park is free for 2 hours why did the vicar warn the driver about ANPR cameras & why are PE claiming £100 if that 2 hours was not exceeded?
  • bod1467
    bod1467 Posts: 15,214 Forumite
    Indeed. I suspect this is pretty much a cut-n-paste of someone else's appeal and hasn't been proof-read properly.
  • Coupon-mad
    Coupon-mad Posts: 151,379 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    xxchaosxx wrote: »
    That letter is perfect, can not fault it in anyway my friend!

    You have pointed out ALL relevant points, have given very good examples of cases that are again relevant to yours.

    Let us know when you get a reply

    :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:



    @itsdayv, DON'T TAKE THE ADVICE OF A NEWBIE LIKE THE ABOVE, WHO SEEMS TO BE ENCOURAGING YOU TO SEND A COPY & PASTE APPEAL THAT YOU HAVEN'T CHECKED FOR IRRELEVANT STUFF! THIS COULD BE A PPC TROLL FROM PARKING EYE, BECAUSE THEY ARE PAID TO SNOOP HERE.

    Do not copy an appeal written for a free car park if this wasn't one! How could it have been a free car park if you were warned away?!

    This Fistral Beach version on the thread below at the bottom of the page, is more relevant to a P&D car park if yours wasn't free?

    https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4632455

    But please, please, do not just randomly COPY a template exactly without any attempt to check it fits your case, nor without at least making some changes to make it personal to your own case. Think of the poor POPLA adjudicators, who must be so bored with seeing the same templates because no-one can be bothered to write their own letters these days... :cool:
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
    CLICK at the top or bottom of any page where it says:
     Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
  • itsdayv
    itsdayv Posts: 9 Forumite
    Hiya,

    Thanks for the tips, I did copy a previous appeal and made a lot of changes so it was relevant to the specific charge...but I accidentally copied the unedited version to here. Thank you all for your assistance, I will let you know of the outcome. How long does it usually take to get a response?
This discussion has been closed.
★ ★ ★ Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 350.9K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453.5K Spending & Discounts
  • 243.9K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 598.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 176.9K Life & Family
  • 257.1K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.
Update Your Picture