Parking eye fistral beach

Sickofbeingtakenforaride wrote: »

Icbandituk, I am sorry to post in your thread, but I wanted to let you know that I in a very similar situation to your son and his friend, I parked in Fistral beach at 9.50pm, for 50 minutes and now have a fine, but there were no lit, clearly visible signs to say that charges were operational 24/7. We didn't leave the car as I was really ill at the time, so I guess it was our fault for not checking that the fees applied. However if there had been clear signs visible from the car on entering the car park, which surely is Parking Eye's responsibility, then we would have paid up. I can see from the many posts on this forum regarding Parking Eye, that unfortunately your son's, and my own cases are not isolated incidents, and this is all too common at Fistral beach.

Coupon-mad; I have read many forum threads with your comments in, I can only thank you for all the information you have provided, I would have paid up had I not gained confidence from your posts. Do you think it would be worthwhile to complain to Newquay council? As you said on a post on 2 Jun 'If this has to go to POPLA it would also be worth including a link to that article to point out that the terrible customer comments span TWO YEARS!' (referring to the Newquay voice article). Also would it be worth complaining to the owner of the land, Britannic Industries? I have read a post of your's regarding a PCN from a different company (Smart Parking), advising that registered keeper to complain to the owner of the land (Asda).

Lastly, do Icbandituk and myself stand less of a chance of winning our cases, as in our cases her son and I did not check the parking signs or buy a ticket that expired? I have read recent forum threads where Parking Eye has taken people to county court, and I am scared this may happen.

Thanks in advance, and I apologise if I have done anything wrong, this is my 1st post on a forum!

I would complain to newquay town council. There was a recent article in the local paper where some council members criticised Parking Eye but they had the wool well and truly pulled over their eyes by a Parking Eye rep!
I am trying to educate the council on their stupidity but any complaints will help. Especialy if your complaint says you will not be coming back to Newquay again because of Parking Eye!

spacey2012 wrote: »

Steaming straight in with you have to "appeal" to popla gives rather a false sense that these chargers are legally correct.
Nothing has changed, they are still contractual penalties and unenforceable on that basis.
By all means point out popla exists but re-assure newbies that this is actually a scam that in most cases is just best ignored unless you have lots of time on your hands or want to get one back in.

Yes it's a scam but NO, people should NOT ignore Parking Eye but should appeal as is painstakingly explained on every flippin' thread here, ad infinitum.

You want to join the team of people spending their own time offering free legal defences to people who ignored Parking Eye? Nope? Don't have enough time on your hands?

Then please don't tell newbies to ignore PE when that advice is naive and outdated.

EHBA wrote: »

You won't get anywhere on lack of signage at Fistral. I can't confirm the current wording though.

They will get somewhere at POPLA though because no-one relies on just one point of appeal and we know how to win.

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Yes it's a scam but NO, people should NOT ignore Parking Eye but should appeal as is painstakingly explained on every flippin' thread here, ad infinitum.

You want to join the team of people spending their own time offering free legal defences to people who ignored Parking Eye? Nope? Don't have enough time on your hands?

Then please don't tell newbies to ignore PE when that advice is naive and outdated.

It is neither naive or outdated:
It is however against the consensus of this group now and the other parking forum.
The reason is that they have been hijacked by a concerted group who think they can bankrupt or punish parking companies to the tune of £27.


Expenses are 100% tax deductible, so if anything it provides them a expense shifting point and creates a legitimate charge for them to base a foundation upon in court.

As many like to talk "legal" here is a short legal lesson for some.

Any case brought before a court needs "Foundation evidence"
Google it.

Foundation Evidence relies on two principles that can be challenged at source:
Proof of Claim:
Proof of Authority:

Proof of claim is proof that what you are claiming is actually owed, in terms of a contractual charge, it must be proven that a contract was inforce, correctly considered and accepted, this is where defence of poor notices comes in.

Proof of Authority is proof the company has authority to operate in the first place, Old Shona may have rejected this argument, that is because Popla is a kangaroo court of mediation and no legal standing and she can make any decision she likes.


Also parking companies may be breaking the law by obstructing planning consents that stipulate "free parking", this is a dodge used by land owners to avoid paying business rates on car parking operations.
A defendant can claim a defence of assisting facilitation of criminal proceedings by assisting the parking company or any company and landowner to defraud business rates.
Case law exits on this point.

Then once both arguments have been dealt with the status of the charge is brought to bear, in the bear pit.
Is this a illicit contractual penalty ?
If it is not how many unpaid charges are claimed against operating costs as losses, they are either losses or they are not.
If they are losses as they claim why do they not seek to offset uncollected losses against tax,
They can have one or the other.

However with walking the POPLA route to partake in the process requires you to submit written evidence that you accept the foundation evidence and proof of claim.
This is where it goes above all of your heads and you put them in the sand.
If Popla rejects as it does and a company decides to take courts action, a defendant is now in a very sticky place indeed.

This is when the forum experts drop them like hot !!!!!.

POPLA is a kangroo court that should have been ignored from the outset as it has no legal standing, but you lot on here are ruddy well determined to give it some.

Your group of "parking company punisher's" may have a "consensus" as you are united in trying to bankrupt the parking companies, which you will not do.
How many people end up sold down the river having accepted Proof of claim and foundation evidence at mediation level, well you dont care as long as the parking firm has £27 to pay.

They do and they now have a legitimate loss of £27 to pursue.


This is not posted as an alternative to your approach, it is posted as an historical record of "told you so".

Once the dummies that run these parking companies wake up, they will pursue all POPLA rejection none payers through the court system relentlessly, even if just for the £27.

Then they will have exactly what they have always wanted, real cases to use.

The way these forums have descended in to this POPLA nonsense is a shame.
But they have.

Just makes sure you do not drop those who fall on the sword by taking the advice to use POPLA up when it fails.
Once people here they are on their own when it all goes belly up and end up having to pay or face court the game bust the parking company is over.

First person to mention parking company troll wins a tin foil hat.:rotfl:

My advice remains the same regardless of POLA
Ignore all speculative invoices, do not negotiate or mediate with third parties or accept proof of claim and proof of authority in doing so.
If you do, do not expect to win in any court.
The decisions of POPLA may not be binding in court, but any and all evidence you present is admissible in court as evidence against you as is the decision of the adjudicate .

If they think they have a case in court, let them put up or shut up, but at least you start from a point of them having no foundation evidence.

Once they do put up, consider admitting part of the claim if there is an actual loss and defending the rest, the part you admit is what they were owed in the first place, the parking fee and nothing else, which you will have already offered them and they will have rejected.

Now, off to goolgle you go
Proof of claim
Proof of authority

Sickofbeingtakenforaride wrote: »

Thanks for all the advice. I have read on MSE's article re private PCNs, that POPLA have reported only a 50% success rate in appeals; do you think that this is truly reflective?

50% ish is correct, and has been recently confirmed by POPLA's annual report.

However, the 50% who lose are the ones who submit weak appeals to POPLA. So far, I have not seen a strong appeal fail.