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
    • iaing1000
    • By iaing1000 11th Dec 17, 4:08 PM
    • 27Posts
    • 29Thanks
    iaing1000
    How to respond to Parking Eye Without Prejudice Save As To Costs letter
    • #1
    • 11th Dec 17, 4:08 PM
    How to respond to Parking Eye Without Prejudice Save As To Costs letter 11th Dec 17 at 4:08 PM
    Hi Folks,

    My first post here so hope you're all able to help.

    Parking Eye are in the process of taking me to court over a £100 parking fine in a hotel car park (reduceable to £60 if I'd paid early) where I was a patron. I'd ignored eveything expecting it to go away until a notice to go to court appeared. They wanted £175 with all the bits they'd added on.

    I've since submitted a defence using templates found online but tailoring it to my particular circumstances and with extra information appertaining to our unique case: The hotel manager has asked them to redact the claim, yet PE responded to them indicating that since it's now going to court and the fees have been paid they will need to proceed. Also, our child was ill at the time and we spent a while having to tend to him in the hotel before returning to our car so that he didn't vomit over the inside. Moreover, there was scant evidence of signage in the area of the car park in which we were situated and nothing in the hotel lobby that made us aware. There are a number of other contraindications that we've also indicated.

    4 days ago I received a letter from Parking Eye with a Without Prejudice Save As To Costs heading explaining that in light of more information having come to light they're willing to accept £60.

    One option is to ignore (would I leave myself vulnerable doing so?) but I think they're being quite bullying now and acting quite unreasonably. My suspicion is that they know the game's up and are trying it on — I'm tempted to be rather bullish in my response and presumably I can exploit the fact that they're 'trying it on' and request that my own costs are reimbursed if they're dragging things on for the sake of it. Perhaps there's a way to articulate that I think they're being unreasonable in some way and will consequently seek my own money.

    Something else I've read is that the contract between them and the 'Principal' (the hotel?) can be provided to me — can I demand this in unredacted format? What timescale can I ask them to do this in? Is it too late to ask for this now the defence has been submitted? Will the judge look unkindly on them if they do not do provide it?

    Also, could there be anything about their Without Prejudice Save As To Costs statement that essentially invalidates it — I've heard that companies band this term around when it's inappropriate hence nullifying its effect!

    So, simply put, what is the most aggressive stance I can take on this and what advice do people have on how to take this forward (even if it ends up being that I just ignore the letter and wait for the court date).


    Thanks so much in advance
Page 3
    • iaing1000
    • By iaing1000 6th Jan 18, 3:13 PM
    • 27 Posts
    • 29 Thanks
    iaing1000
    Thanks so much again for your help, it really is appreciated :-)

    I've sent the following:



    Dear Sir/Madam,

    In response to your recent letter please note that I do not intend to pay because this speculative invoice is without any basis in law. Moreover, I am not in receipt of your reply to the defence which you claim was sent 20th December.

    In your letter to me you stated that cancellation is only done at ParkingEye!!!8217;s discretion once legal proceedings have commenced. However, it appears the manager of the Hotel had been led to believe that cancellation was not possible at this stage, and then herself had a contradictory email from the enforcements team. I intend to cross examine your witness on the day to explain why they have misrepresented the contract and failure of the witness to appear will be brought to the court!!!8217;s attention.

    Please find attached my completed Directions Questionnaire which has also been sent to the CCBC,
    • iaing1000
    • By iaing1000 20th Jan 18, 7:32 AM
    • 27 Posts
    • 29 Thanks
    iaing1000
    First letter from PE (7th April 2017)
    https://drive.google.com/file/d/1HImarNWoQs...iew?usp=sharing

    Second letter from PE (16th April 2017)

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ik7_WqpLF6...iew?usp=sharing

    Third letter from PE (11th May 2017)

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NBl539Ux4J...iew?usp=sharing

    Fourth letter from PE (26th May 2017) - letter before county court claim
    https://drive.google.com/file/d/16EaUjkeyNJ...p=sharing"]


    Signs (from their reply to defence doc)
    https://drive.google.com/file/d/12fXBreK5Z7...iew?usp=sharing
    https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VA7r54fykY...iew?usp=sharing
    https://drive.google.com/file/d/19lDkn7VOfS...iew?usp=sharing
    https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Ddh_h-HVj3...iew?usp=sharing


    Defence Skeleton Argument
    https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VQBVMpKcJ6...iew?usp=sharing

    PE Reply To Defence
    https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_s1arlOyGD...iew?usp=sharing


    Recent Email from PE
    https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Ls1-7pdDMk...iew?usp=sharing
    • iaing1000
    • By iaing1000 20th Jan 18, 7:35 AM
    • 27 Posts
    • 29 Thanks
    iaing1000
    So, folks, here's a review of all the letters exchanged, the signs, and my defence along with their reply to defence.

    The last link is their latest email which again offers the £40 to forgot it all - and also challenges my assertion that they misrepresented the contract.

    What's my next move?

    Thanks so much again.
    • claxtome
    • By claxtome 20th Jan 18, 8:55 AM
    • 559 Posts
    • 651 Thanks
    claxtome
    Just read your thread.
    It is good to see that you iaiang1000 continues to fight and not cave in to the reduced amount offered. Others may have done.
    Will leave to others for suggested next move.
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 20th Jan 18, 9:16 AM
    • 7,159 Posts
    • 9,471 Thanks
    beamerguy
    So, folks, here's a review of all the letters exchanged, the signs, and my defence along with their reply to defence.

    The last link is their latest email which again offers the £40 to forgot it all - and also challenges my assertion that they misrepresented the contract.

    What's my next move?

    Thanks so much again.
    Originally posted by iaing1000
    OH DEAR, Parking Eye are being stupid again.

    So, yet another Without Prejudice letter ???

    Let's assume you were stupid enough to pay
    the £40 ....... they would drop the case ?
    BUT in the letter to the hotel, they stated they
    could not do this ??

    They lied to their principal and to you

    If they were that convinced that they would win,
    why would they keep offering you £40 to clear
    this (stopping court action)

    Parking Eye said they could not cancel court action
    which we all know is a blantant lie and so do
    the courts.
    This is a bit like blackmail ... pay £40 and we
    will stop.
    You now need to go in front of a judge

    The hotel requested Parking Eye cancel, ensure
    you have this in writing.
    Parking Eye responded to the hotel with a
    Without Prejudice letter which told the hotel
    a lie


    READ THIS ....
    Section headed "What are the exceptions?"
    https://www.mills-reeve.com/without-prejudice-privelege-update/

    A judge needs to know that Parking Eye are
    restricting you showing the court all the
    correspondence

    Parking Eye have really lost their marbles on this

    !!!8220;without prejudice save as to costs!!!8221;?

    Correspondence marked "without prejudice save as to costs" can be referred to by the parties when the substantive proceedings have been concluded in order to enable the court to make a costs order. Part 36 offers or other offers with this caption can be taken into account whereas an offer marked !!!8220;without prejudice!!!8221; cannot be seen by the court unless both parties agree.

    Get prepared with your costs schedule
    Last edited by beamerguy; 20-01-2018 at 9:28 AM.
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • iaing1000
    • By iaing1000 20th Jan 18, 9:25 PM
    • 27 Posts
    • 29 Thanks
    iaing1000
    Hi, yes all a bit crazy with the constantly dropped 'fine', although it seems that they stop at £40! (that's the second at that value after the first at £60).

    To be clear, the hotel manager had spoken to PE on the phone and they'd said it couldn't be cancelled (she articluated this to me in an email). She then received an email from the enforcements team that read as follows:

    We note that you have requested that this Parking Charge be cancelled but unfortunately, having reviewed the case, we can confirm that this matter has now progressed and a county court claim has been issued to recover the outstanding amount. In this instance, the motorist did not contact us regarding the Parking Charge upon receipt and did not lodge an appeal with our dedicated appeals team. This was despite 4 letters being issued before legal action.

    As a court claim has now been issued, we have incurred additional costs in the sum of £75. These are in addition to the outstanding Parking Charge. In total the outstanding sum claimed is £175.

    However, in an effort to bring this matter to a conclusion without further cost to either party and bearing in mind the circumstances now outlined, ParkingEye would be prepared to accept £60 in settlement of this claim. We can confirm that we have today contacted the motorist with this offer and have asked that payment be made within the next 14 days.

    Please note that should the motorist not wish to make payment, then they will need to follow the instructions provided with the claim form to either defend the claim or admit the claim in full/part. In default of the court receiving a response, a default judgment may be entered against them.

    Kind regards,

    They are claiming to me it's discretionary, and I guess one could argue that the above email to the hotel manager is based on them using their discretion in deciding whether to pursue based on costs they had already incurred (albeit that it's probalby BS!). There's certainly an apparent contradiction is what the hotel manager was told and then receive dvia email and I intend to call her as a witness should it go to court.

    In their most recent response to me, where they try to refute my claim of there being an inconsistency/contradiction in how they relayed the contract to the hotel manager, they cite the contract between themselves and the hotel. Should I ask to see this? And on the assumpotion that they decline does this stand me in better stead with the judge?

    Thanks again
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 20th Jan 18, 9:37 PM
    • 17,252 Posts
    • 27,171 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    And on the assumpotion that they decline does this stand me in better stead with the judge?
    Judges are their own people. I!!!8217;d be very cautious in second guessing one.

    Notwithstanding anything else, I!!!8217;d be contacting the hotel and asking why on earth, given that PE are refusing to cooperate with them following their request to help their customer, are they continuing to allow PE anywhere near their paying guests.

    Ask if they!!!8217;d like you to warn other potential guests by way of Facebook, Twitter and TripAdviser, which now seems the sensible option for the hotel, of the real dangers of staying and parking there, because, quite possibly, it may land a guest in court.

    Let us know their reply!
    Last edited by Umkomaas; 20-01-2018 at 9:39 PM.
    We cannot provide you with a silver bullet to get you out of this. You have to be in for the long run, and need to involve yourself in research and work for you to get rid of this. It is not simple. We will help, but can't do it for you.

    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 21st Jan 18, 2:57 PM
    • 56,112 Posts
    • 69,768 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Have you asked the Hotel to now bring this sorry tale to a close by the Hotel paying the £40?
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • iaing1000
    • By iaing1000 21st Jan 18, 3:05 PM
    • 27 Posts
    • 29 Thanks
    iaing1000
    Hi

    Not yet, it's all been with PE so far.

    I shall contact them and mention that, now that PE are continuing to pursue this, I'll need to nominate the manager as a witness if they're unable to have the fine removed (currently at £40 though to me it's the principle). In particular to confirm the details I have via email from her and to also relay any additional dealing with PE and all in light of my particular circumstances (and there being no indicatio of payment in the lobby etv).

    Do you imagine this strikes the right approach/tone - i.e. the potential that they might need to go to court! Or should I be more explicit about them paying the £40?

    Should I also contact PE asking for the contract and showing the emails from the manager just to highlight I have a record of this?

    Thanks agin
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 21st Jan 18, 6:27 PM
    • 7,159 Posts
    • 9,471 Thanks
    beamerguy
    Hi

    Not yet, it's all been with PE so far.

    I shall contact them and mention that, now that PE are continuing to pursue this, I'll need to nominate the manager as a witness if they're unable to have the fine removed (currently at £40 though to me it's the principle). In particular to confirm the details I have via email from her and to also relay any additional dealing with PE and all in light of my particular circumstances (and there being no indicatio of payment in the lobby etv).

    Do you imagine this strikes the right approach/tone - i.e. the potential that they might need to go to court! Or should I be more explicit about them paying the £40?

    Should I also contact PE asking for the contract and showing the emails from the manager just to highlight I have a record of this?

    Thanks agin
    Originally posted by iaing1000
    The hotel should do something as they are party
    to this scam.
    The hotel should realise that in court they must
    tell the truth which will be detremental to PE, especially
    the fact that PE said it could not stop this going court.

    Such a blantant lie will certainly not go down
    well with a judge and could lead to why parking
    eye is wasting the courts time .... which they are

    I hope the hotel understands that this will damage
    them
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 21st Jan 18, 6:34 PM
    • 56,112 Posts
    • 69,768 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    I would explicitly ask that the Hotel settle the matter, because they were at fault for not drawing the unworkable and predatory system (PE's finest) to the attention of patrons, and also failed to alert patrons to the fact that if they were unfairly fined they could have asked the Hotel to cancel it on the spot (and it would have been).

    Unless you want your day in court. Which you might well do, albeit it still looks to me that PE will not want to appear at a hearing over this and might just discontinue.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 21st Jan 18, 6:52 PM
    • 7,159 Posts
    • 9,471 Thanks
    beamerguy

    Unless you want your day in court. Which you might well do, albeit it still looks to me that PE will not want to appear at a hearing over this and might just discontinue.
    Originally posted by Coupon-mad
    I agree, PE really have no option but to discontinue,
    mind you, with the mindset of PE maybe they want to
    get whooped by the court

    All this over the reduced £40, how pathetic PE
    Last edited by beamerguy; 21-01-2018 at 6:55 PM.
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • iaing1000
    • By iaing1000 23rd Jan 18, 11:16 AM
    • 27 Posts
    • 29 Thanks
    iaing1000
    This planned for the hotel, any thoughts before it gets emailed?

    Hi XXXXXXXXXXX,

    It seems that ParkingEye are continuing to be intransigent in their stance regarding the parking charge made against me and are pursuing the matter to court. They have now again offered a reduced settlement of £40 (down from the last offer of £60), which is little puzzling given their apparent confidence. As I have previously explained I am not prepared to be subjected to their unworkable and predatory system and would ask that you firmly demand that they redact the charge, or settle the matter with them yourselves. It has become apparent that the option to cancel the charge is entirely at their discretion, at any stage, and as such they are misleading you if they claim it cannot be done whether or not legal proceeding have begun or not.

    Please note that should the matter go to court I have requested that you attend as a witness and be able to confirm and show the complete correspondence exchanged with ParkingEye and myself, as well as explain the hotel's relationship with them. I recognise that this may be inconvenient yet I feel I must make a stand against their practices. Moreover, it should be noted that the hotel bear some culpability in respect of this by a) not having visible signs in the lobby, or elsewhere in the hotel, that payment be made at the hotel which somewhat contradicts ParkingEye!!!8217;s assertion that signage is complete and unmissable and b) employing fly-by-night predatory sharks whose only interest is a flawed business model that generates money from legitimate users of the car park !!!8212; needless to say this detracts from the good name of XXXX Hotels and finally, c) failed to alert patrons to the fact that if they were unfairly fined they could have asked the Hotel to cancel it on the spot (and it would have been).

    Please let me know if you are able to resolve or settle the matter with ParkingEye in order that I can know how to further instruct the court on witness attendance. Thanks once again for your time with this and look forward to hearing from you before long,


    All the best
    My Name
    • Computersaysno
    • By Computersaysno 23rd Jan 18, 11:37 AM
    • 928 Posts
    • 719 Thanks
    Computersaysno
    make sure you slam in a counterclaim [for about £700]...that way of they try to discontinue you'll either have a walkover in court or they'll have to spend big to defend it.
    Welcome to the world of 'Protect the brand at the cost of free speech'
    • iaing1000
    • By iaing1000 23rd Jan 18, 11:38 AM
    • 27 Posts
    • 29 Thanks
    iaing1000
    Should I also write to PE in response to their latest £40 offer and their statement disputing my assertion that they have misrepresented the contract on the premise that each party (PE & the hotel) have a copy of the contract to clear up any confusion?

    If so, should I ask to see the contract and/or perhaps mention that I'll be calling the hotel manager as a witness?

    Ta again folks
    • iaing1000
    • By iaing1000 23rd Jan 18, 12:01 PM
    • 27 Posts
    • 29 Thanks
    iaing1000
    And this to go to PE:

    Dear Sir/Madam,


    In response to your recent email please note that I do not intend to pay for the same reasons I have previously given.

    I maintain that you have misrepresented the contract to the Hotel Manager. Your assertion that either party has recourse to the contract to clear up any confusion is unrealistic insofar as most managers are not in a position to trawl lengthy legal contracts. It is much more realistic that both parties to the contract can reasonably rely on one another to correctly inform the other of the terms where they are not clear to the other party.


    ParkingEye have clearly been remiss in this and, worryingly, have indeed misrepresented the contract to the Hotel Manager as the correspondence between the parties attests. Moreover, a phone call between the Hotel Manager and ParkingEye, where the manager was clearly told that cancelling 'was not possible' at this stage, will be brought to the attention of the judge. It is my intention to scrutinise this in court with the Hotel Manager called as witness and all correspondence and transcripts of phone calls made available.



    My Name
    • claxtome
    • By claxtome 23rd Jan 18, 12:22 PM
    • 559 Posts
    • 651 Thanks
    claxtome
    Letter to hotel in post #53 mentions "Redacted" think you meant to use a different word as to redact means:
    censor or obscure (part of a text) for legal or security purposes

    I suspect you wanted to use "cancel" or similar

    Both letters look reasonable to me otherwise.
    I will leave to others to comment further...
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 23rd Jan 18, 12:51 PM
    • 7,159 Posts
    • 9,471 Thanks
    beamerguy
    As said above do not say

    "demand that they redact the charge"

    You demand they CANCEL the charge

    You write if these are your friends ... they are NOT

    So, this is now formal

    1: For the personal attention of xxx (hotel)
    2: Dear Sir/Madam
    3: Yours faithfully

    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 23rd Jan 18, 1:41 PM
    • 6,601 Posts
    • 5,775 Thanks
    KeithP
    Please let me know if you are able to resolve or settle the matter with ParkingEye in order that I can know how to further instruct the court on witness attendance. Thanks once again for your time with this and look forward to hearing from you before long,
    Originally posted by iaing1000
    Would that be better as:
    Please let me know when you have resolved or settled the matter with ParkingEye.
    .
    • iaing1000
    • By iaing1000 25th Jan 18, 4:16 PM
    • 27 Posts
    • 29 Thanks
    iaing1000
    Here's what went out to the hotel and also another copy going to head office or CEO of the hotels:

    FAO Head Office XXXX Hotels

    Dear Sir/Madam,

    I have previously been in contact with the manager of your XXXXXXXX branch, Ms XYZ, with regard to a parking charge made against me. It seems that ParkingEye are continuing to be intransigent in their stance regarding this and are pursuing the matter to court. They have now offered a reduced settlement of £40 (down from the previous reduced offer of £60), which is little puzzling given their supposed confidence. As I have previously explained to your manager I am not prepared to be subjected to their unworkable and predatory system and would ask that you firmly demand that they cancel the charge, or settle the matter with them yourselves. It has become apparent that the option to cancel the charge is entirely at their discretion, at any stage, and as such they are misleading you if they claim it cannot be done whether or not legal proceeding have begun or not.

    Please note that should the matter go to court I have requested that Ms XYZ attend as a witness and be able to confirm and show the complete correspondence exchanged with ParkingEye and myself, as well as explain the hotel's relationship with them. I recognise that this may be inconvenient yet I feel I must make a stand against their practices. Moreover, it should be noted that the hotel bear some culpability in respect of this by a) not having visible signs in the lobby, or elsewhere in the hotel, that payment be made at the hotel which somewhat contradicts ParkingEye’s assertion that signage is complete and unmissable and b) employing fly-by-night predatory sharks whose only interest is a flawed business model that generates money from legitimate users of the car park — needless to say this detracts from the good name of XXXX Hotels should this matter be publicised on TripAdvisor and similar, and, finally, c) failing to alert patrons to the fact that if they were unfairly fined they could have asked the XXXX Hotel to cancel it on the spot (and it would have been).

    Please let me know when you have resolved or settled the matter with ParkingEye in order that I can know how to further instruct the court on witness attendance. Thanks once again for your time with this and look forward to hearing from you before long,


    Yours Faithfully

    And here's what's come back from the Manager:

    Hi XXX,

    Thank you for your email update

    Unfortunately this is completely out of my hands now and I understand that you would want to challenge this as much as possible, however all correspondence is between you and Parking Eye now

    I am sorry I cannot help any further as we do employ Parking Eye to manage the car park for us

    Warmest Regards




    A little odd, and clearly not grasping what it is to 'employ' someone. Usually you get to tell them what to do :-) My guess is she's not in a senior enough position to gauge the publicity damage that this could undo (heaven knows what the marketing budget for such an organisation might be!). Anyway, I'm nominating her as a witness now.








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

141Posts Today

1,142Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • I've decided my weekend starts here while the sun's glow is still baskable. So I'm signing off. Have a great weeke? https://t.co/9FxNEpDs6p

  • No not correct. The big six do, but you can get fixed tariffs guaranteed not to rise and about 25% cheaper. Just tr? https://t.co/B2ft5OS3Ig

  • Baaaa! Scottish Power has bleated and followed the herd, today announcing it's putting up energy prices by 5.5%. R? https://t.co/vi3hBxo4Hn

  • Follow Martin