Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • dgwave73
    • By dgwave73 2nd Aug 13, 2:20 PM
    • 22Posts
    • 4Thanks
    dgwave73
    Parking Eye - County Court Claim Form
    • #1
    • 2nd Aug 13, 2:20 PM
    Parking Eye - County Court Claim Form 2nd Aug 13 at 2:20 PM
    I got a parking eye 'Parking Charge Notice' back in Jan 2013. I parked in Pizza Hut, had a meal, but didn't know I had to put a car reg in to a little computer in their foyer. I got the notice through the post shortly afterwards despite having been a paying customer! (Paid cash so can't prove the transaction)
    I have followed the advice to ignore all the previous letters - 3 or 4 now I think.

    Today I have had through what looks like a Northampton County Court Claim Form. It has ParkingEye as the claimant and is claiming 150 from me . It seems official and gives me 14 days to acknowledge. Is this genuine or another pseudo official document?
Page 1
    • Guys Dad
    • By Guys Dad 2nd Aug 13, 2:41 PM
    • 10,860 Posts
    • 10,345 Thanks
    Guys Dad
    • #2
    • 2nd Aug 13, 2:41 PM
    • #2
    • 2nd Aug 13, 2:41 PM
    As it is Parking Eye, it is probably if not certainly real.
    • zzzLazyDaisy
    • By zzzLazyDaisy 2nd Aug 13, 2:58 PM
    • 12,134 Posts
    • 18,762 Thanks
    zzzLazyDaisy
    • #3
    • 2nd Aug 13, 2:58 PM
    • #3
    • 2nd Aug 13, 2:58 PM
    You can check if it is real as there will be a number for you to log onto the court website to file your acknowledgment and enter your defence. But as Guys Dad says, parking eye are issuing lots of claims at the moment so it is almost certainly a real claim.
    I'm a retired employment solicitor. Hopefully some of my comments might be useful, but they are only my opinion and not intended as legal advice.
    • dgwave73
    • By dgwave73 2nd Aug 13, 3:56 PM
    • 22 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    dgwave73
    • #4
    • 2nd Aug 13, 3:56 PM
    • #4
    • 2nd Aug 13, 3:56 PM
    So all the advice to ignore all the letters hasnt done me much good!
    What next? Acknowldege receipt of the claim and put up a defence?
    • zzzLazyDaisy
    • By zzzLazyDaisy 2nd Aug 13, 4:28 PM
    • 12,134 Posts
    • 18,762 Thanks
    zzzLazyDaisy
    • #5
    • 2nd Aug 13, 4:28 PM
    • #5
    • 2nd Aug 13, 4:28 PM
    So all the advice to ignore all the letters hasnt done me much good!
    What next? Acknowldege receipt of the claim and put up a defence?
    Originally posted by dgwave73
    The advice changed around February when POPLA appeals started to get off the ground. Things move on, advice changes, and no-one has a crystal ball - Parking Eye has only been issuing court claims for the past two months.

    There is a lot of advice on here.

    Basically you must file an acknowledgment to the court action within 14 days. This extends the time for filing the defence to 28 days in total.

    Did you pay for the pizza by card? Or do you still have the receipt (unlikely I know). If you do have some form of proof that you ate there on that day, take it, with a copy of the court claim, and speak to the manager (not a waiter or the person on the till). The manager has the power to cancel the charge, so that is your first port of call.

    Next read the POPLA decisions thread above, start with the recent ones and work backwards but don't go back more than three or four months. Look at the points of law raised in the appeals. Court proceedings are not the same as POPLA, but a lot of the legal arguments are transferrable.

    Next look at the letter before action they sent you before they issued legal proceedings. It must comply with the Practice Direction on Pre-action Conduct (see below). In fact one of the things they must do is to tell you about the Practice Direction and then they must follow certain steps before starting proceedings. PE's LBA's are non-compliant as they don't want you to know about the Practice Direction, and they don't want to give you the information contained in the Practice Direction. If the LBA is not compliant and the PPC has not taken the steps required iin the PD you can ask the court to stay the proceedings to allow the parties to comply with the PD under para 4 of the PD

    Here is the full text of The Practice Direction on Pre-action Conduct, Annex A Para 2:

    2. Claimant’s letter before claim
    2.1
    The claimant’s letter should give concise details about the matter. This should enable the defendant to understand and investigate the issues without needing to request further information. The letter should include –
    (1) the claimant’s full name and address;
    (2) the basis on which the claim is made (i.e. why the claimant says the defendant is liable);
    (3) a clear summary of the facts on which the claim is based;
    (4) what the claimant wants from the defendant;
    (5) if financial loss is claimed, an explanation of how the amount has been calculated; and
    (6) details of any funding arrangement (within the meaning of rule 43.2(1)(k) of the CPR) that has been entered into by the claimant.
    2.2
    The letter should also –
    (1) list the essential documents on which the claimant intends to rely;
    (2) set out the form of ADR (if any) that the claimant considers the most suitable and invite the defendant to agree to this;
    (3) state the date by which the claimant considers it reasonable for a full response to be provided by the defendant; and
    (4) identify and ask for copies of any relevant documents not in the claimant's possession and which the claimant wishes to see.
    2.3
    Unless the defendant is known to be legally represented the letter should –
    (1) refer the defendant to this Practice Direction and in particular draw attention to paragraph 4 concerning the court's powers to impose sanctions for failure to comply with the Practice Direction; and
    (2) inform the defendant that ignoring the letter before claim may lead to the claimant starting proceedings and may increase the defendant's liability for costs.

    Also a pre May PE PCN from PE does not comply with PoFA as it does not identify the creditor. Which means they cannot pursue the registered keeper, so if you are the registered keeper (and not a driver who was earlier named by the registered keeper) they have no legal right to pursue you.

    You will find lots of other strings to your defence on the POPLA thread.
    Last edited by zzzLazyDaisy; 04-08-2013 at 10:38 PM.
    I'm a retired employment solicitor. Hopefully some of my comments might be useful, but they are only my opinion and not intended as legal advice.
    • dgwave73
    • By dgwave73 2nd Aug 13, 5:03 PM
    • 22 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    dgwave73
    • #6
    • 2nd Aug 13, 5:03 PM
    • #6
    • 2nd Aug 13, 5:03 PM
    Thanks for the advice so far - very thorough. I am slightly confused now though. I ignored the Parking Eye letters right from the start so have never submitted any appeal to them. is it right that I can no longer go to POPLA without having done this. Also, you mention a thread defence info on the POPLA thread but I can't see the thread link - can you re-post? Do I stand much of a chance of a defence by having not entered my reg in the foyer computer (as per the signage) despite being a paying customer? Is it still worth a visit to the restaurant to speak to the manager about the charge notice at source?
    Also, as you say "a pre May PE PCN from PE does not comply with PoFA as it does not identify the creditor" can this form part of the defence? Many thanks again.
    • zzzLazyDaisy
    • By zzzLazyDaisy 2nd Aug 13, 5:49 PM
    • 12,134 Posts
    • 18,762 Thanks
    zzzLazyDaisy
    • #7
    • 2nd Aug 13, 5:49 PM
    • #7
    • 2nd Aug 13, 5:49 PM
    thanks for the advice so far - very thorough. I am slightly confused now though. I ignored the parking eye letters right from the start so have never submitted any appeal to them. Is it right that i can no longer go to popla without having done this.

    yes, you are already in the court process, but the ppc is supposed to offer you adr as part of the court process. in practice pe refuse to do this, but it is a point worth flagging up to the court.

    also, you mention a thread defence info on the popla thread but i can't see the thread link - can you re-post?

    will do

    do i stand much of a chance of a defence by having not entered my reg in the foyer computer (as per the signage) despite being a paying customer?

    pe do not progress ever case to a court hearing. It only costs them 15 to issue a claim, so they are using the court process as an additional method of extorting people to pay up. Some people pay up, some people ignore - in which case pe wins by default - some people defend and from those defences pe pick and choose which cases to take to court. Logically they are less likely to take a well defended case to court than a weak one. But there are never any guarantees


    is it still worth a visit to the restaurant to speak to the manager about the charge notice at source?

    yes, absolutely, do it now - yell them you are appalled that you are getting 'fined' and taken to court for spending money in their restaurant, just because you made a simple mistake and that if this isn't sorted out you and all your friends will be eating elsewhere in future be calm and polite, but firm


    also, as you say "a pre may pe pcn from pe does not comply with pofa as it does not identify the creditor" can this form part of the defence?

    yes, along with many other points


    many thanks again.
    Originally posted by dgwave73
    Here is the link to the POPLA decisions thread - start here and work backwards, have a read of the appeals and the legal points that are made. These are not defences to court actions, but the law they refer to is relevant to your defence

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/forumdisplay.php?f=163

    ,
    Last edited by zzzLazyDaisy; 02-08-2013 at 7:52 PM.
    I'm a retired employment solicitor. Hopefully some of my comments might be useful, but they are only my opinion and not intended as legal advice.
  • Forensic
    • #8
    • 2nd Aug 13, 7:51 PM
    • #8
    • 2nd Aug 13, 7:51 PM
    I'm on the same boat, facing court action but having gone through POPLA. Sorry, where are these links for POPLA and LBA?
  • Forensic
    • #9
    • 2nd Aug 13, 7:52 PM
    • #9
    • 2nd Aug 13, 7:52 PM
    I'm a bit annoyed, I got rid of my LBA some time ago and it appeared to contain none of the information criteria listed by zzz.
    • zzzLazyDaisy
    • By zzzLazyDaisy 2nd Aug 13, 7:56 PM
    • 12,134 Posts
    • 18,762 Thanks
    zzzLazyDaisy
    I'm on the same boat, facing court action but having gone through POPLA. Sorry, where are these links for POPLA and LBA?
    Originally posted by Forensic
    The POPLA sticky is the first thread on this forum

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/forumdisplay.php?f=163

    The LBA thread is here

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=4705657

    Please do not hijack someone else's thread - ask questions on your own thread, otherwise it gets too complicated for the people who are trying to help.
    I'm a retired employment solicitor. Hopefully some of my comments might be useful, but they are only my opinion and not intended as legal advice.
    • patman99
    • By patman99 2nd Aug 13, 8:49 PM
    • 8,270 Posts
    • 9,802 Thanks
    patman99
    I think the reason for Parking Eye starting to issue Court proceedings is because of all the agro over on Aldi's Facebook page aimed (in)directly at them.

    A standard and robust defense should make sure to mention case Law such as VCS v. Ibbotson where a Judge ordered VCS to prove that there was a legal Act that allowed them to act on behalf of a landowner in forming a contract between the landowner and the land user. VCS never did come back to prove they had the right to act in such a manner.

    What is really needed is for someone like ZZZLD to prepare a standard defense that can be used to defend against PPC Court action.

    Btw, you can apply to have the case 'struck-out' (I believe that is the correct term), but this may annoy P/E even more.
    Never Knowingly Understood.

    Member #1 of 1,000 challenge - 13.74/ 1000 (that's 1.374%)

    3-6 month EF 0/3600 (that's 0 days worth)

    Do you/your spouse earn less than 197 p/w ?. Fill-in Form R85 and get your Bank interest Tax free.
    • trisontana
    • By trisontana 2nd Aug 13, 9:29 PM
    • 9,028 Posts
    • 13,969 Thanks
    trisontana
    PE were issuing court claims before the Aldi Facebook thing took off. It's believed that PE started this court-paper blitz after they recruited Rachel Ledson who wants to make a name for herself.
    What part of "A whop bop-a-lu a whop bam boo" don't you understand?
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 2nd Aug 13, 10:27 PM
    • 23,967 Posts
    • 38,493 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    PE were issuing court claims before the Aldi Facebook thing took off. It's believed that PE started this court-paper blitz after they recruited Rachel Ledson who wants to make a name for herself.
    Originally posted by trisontana
    For sure - however, the real surge of LBA's was related to Aldi customers and was something I noticed. I raised the query on Pepipoo at the time as to whether the targeting of Aldi customers was a strategy by PE. Despite contrary views, I was correct and the rest, as they say, is history.

    The continuing flak (almost 2 months on) via the Aldi FB page and the growing interest from the media, rests firmly at the feet of the unholy alliance between Aldi and their masters - ParkingEye. What a complete and utter mess they've made of this - and it will inevitably end in serious tears for them.

    The fight goes on!
    • trisontana
    • By trisontana 3rd Aug 13, 7:44 AM
    • 9,028 Posts
    • 13,969 Thanks
    trisontana
    You are correct about the the relationship between PE and Aldi. The former seem to be able to rule the roost . Even when ALDI tell PE to cancel a court case they refuse to do this unless the motorist pays PE 50. Also, I suspect the hand of PE behind reducing parking times and conditions at Aldi car-parks, sometimes contrary to planning regulations and promises made by Aldi when applying for planning permission.
    What part of "A whop bop-a-lu a whop bam boo" don't you understand?
    • patman99
    • By patman99 3rd Aug 13, 12:31 PM
    • 8,270 Posts
    • 9,802 Thanks
    patman99
    What we need to do is keep a tally of how many cases P/E take to Court & how many they actually win.
    Never Knowingly Understood.

    Member #1 of 1,000 challenge - 13.74/ 1000 (that's 1.374%)

    3-6 month EF 0/3600 (that's 0 days worth)

    Do you/your spouse earn less than 197 p/w ?. Fill-in Form R85 and get your Bank interest Tax free.
  • spacey2012
    They appear to be having some trouble turning up for the dates .
    Looks like a fishing expedition for default claims.
    Be happy...
    • Guys Dad
    • By Guys Dad 3rd Aug 13, 3:06 PM
    • 10,860 Posts
    • 10,345 Thanks
    Guys Dad
    They appear to be having some trouble turning up for the dates .
    Looks like a fishing expedition for default claims.
    Originally posted by spacey2012
    They only need a 1 in 5 default to make it worth while, taking into account their on-costs.
    • dgwave73
    • By dgwave73 4th Aug 13, 9:00 PM
    • 22 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    dgwave73
    Yet more confusion (its a bit of a minefield isn't it) partly because of all the acronyms.....

    I had the letter before action and ignored that (as per previous advice) only now to have the court paperwork. If I understand it right I have to send a formal acknowledgement within 14days, challenging the legalities of the PCN. I am then required to submit my defence, again within a certain time. I have done some online stuff from the court papers via the money claim channels - I think I have sent an automated acknowledgement - can I still send a letter constructed from the info from the POPLA appeals thread......? Will I get a reply before I then send in the defence....?

    Thanks
    • zzzLazyDaisy
    • By zzzLazyDaisy 4th Aug 13, 9:07 PM
    • 12,134 Posts
    • 18,762 Thanks
    zzzLazyDaisy
    Yet more confusion (its a bit of a minefield isn't it) partly because of all the acronyms.....

    I had the letter before action and ignored that (as per previous advice) only now to have the court paperwork. If I understand it right I have to send a formal acknowledgement within 14days, challenging the legalities of the PCN. I am then required to submit my defence, again within a certain time. I have done some online stuff from the court papers via the money claim channels - I think I have sent an automated acknowledgement - can I still send a letter constructed from the info from the POPLA appeals thread......? Will I get a reply before I then send in the defence....?

    Thanks
    Originally posted by dgwave73


    It sounds like you had the stamped papers from Northampton County Court, with a case number on it and you went to Money Claim on-line and entered your acknowledgment of service?

    This extends the time for filing the defence to 28 days in total.

    You won't get any reply from the court until after you have sent your defence in.
    Last edited by zzzLazyDaisy; 04-08-2013 at 10:41 PM.
    I'm a retired employment solicitor. Hopefully some of my comments might be useful, but they are only my opinion and not intended as legal advice.
    • dgwave73
    • By dgwave73 4th Aug 13, 9:28 PM
    • 22 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    dgwave73
    As I ignored the LBA (as it was from PE) do I need to send a formal acknowledgement letter (with the legal challenges) in addition to the online acceptance, or do I just send in a defence? Can I include all the same arguments as per the acknowledgement letters (lack of practice direction compliance, requesting POPLA reference, cost breakdown,contractual issues etc) or just tell them that I was a customer who didn't know about entering registrations in a computer...
    Again, thanks
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

1,093Posts Today

7,456Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • RT @MartinSLewis: I sued Facebook for defamation over scam ads & settled in return for 2 things that LAUNCH TODAY -1on1 scam help at new C?

  • Unbelievable. I needed a cab to rush for an interview re Facebook. Saw one stop, man getting out with suitcases. He? https://t.co/rw1BpZoZga

  • RT @susannareid100: Well done Martin - this is important. I get lots of enquiries about ads with my image promoting diet pills. Don?t giv?

  • Follow Martin