Parking Eye- Appeal on hold

[surveyor_101]

My company having a fleet of vehicles have received an ANPR ticket from a carpark our member staff pulled into for 12 minutes to check an address etc. Stayed in the vehicle and has him exiting etc.

Company sec appealed as its our sign written van and parking eye took the hole 14 days to write back and say appeal on hold until you give us driver details. What's that got to do with it?...

I have picked this up and the commercial guy and I recently got an horizon ticket and sent an appeal template off a website asking tons of questions and surprise surprise they cancelled the ticket on my company car.

I have responded as I don't see what relevance the drivers details have other than he she may of breached their terms.


See my letter


Parking Charge Notice – ************* (Reference your letter dated the 19th April 2016)

Thank you for the aforementioned letter, this makes reference to the appeal being referred due to our organisation not providing the drivers details. I fail to see the relevance of ************* is the registered keepers of the vehicle. (Please note I am not the driver)

I am not ignoring your charge for a purported parking infraction. As this is purely a charge (not a statutory penalty) issued under a purported contract and the driver has not been identified, I require the following information so that I can make an informed decision:

1. Who is the party that contracted with your company for the provision of their services? I require their contact details.
2. What is the full legal identity of the landowner?
3. As you are not the landowner please provide a contemporaneous and unredacted copy of your contract with the landholder that demonstrate that you have their authority to both issue parking charges and litigate in your own name.
4. Is your charge based on damages for breach of contract? Answer yes or no.
5. If the charge is based on damages for breach of contract please provide your justification of this sum.
6. Is your charge based on a contractually agreed sum for the provision of parking? Answer yes or no.
7. If the charge is based on a contractually agreed sum for the provision of parking please provide a valid VAT invoice for this 'service'.
8. Please provide a copy of the signs that purportedly were on site which you contend formed a contract with the driver on that occasion.

If you believe you have a cause of action, send a Letter before Claim within the next 21 days and I will take advice and will respond.

Do not send debt collector letters and do not add any costs or surcharges. I will not respond to those, so to involve another firm would be a failure to mitigate your alleged loss. In any case, the addition of any debt collector 'costs' is not my liability because the POFA 2012 can only potentially hold a registered keeper liable if certain provisions have been met and even then, the 'amount of the parking charge' is the only amount pursuable.





Yours faithfully,

[surveyor_101]

PurpleMoonlight said:

Is this is a pay and display car park and the driver didn't?

Think so he entered got his baring and then exited never left the van, all I have is ANPR and 12 minute time gap.

Not sure if legally we can give them his details but he won't pay it, think my md would pay it rather than go through the hassle of give drivers details. I said I wailed write to them as I think £60 -100 for 12 mins is a bit steep.

Since horizon bent over after that wording was sent and I got a second letter saying it was dropped after I complained to Sainsburys so my horizon ticket was cancelled twice.

[surveyor_101]

I this case he sat in van engine running for 12 mins if you were lost would you pay £60 or £100 quid for 12 minutes sat in ur car reading a map?

Not lengths driver won't pay and Doesn't want his details sent I don't believe the loses are reasonable.

[surveyor_101]

Monkeylegend said:

I think you should be paying for crimes against grammar and spelling based on this response.




Only joking before everybody gets uppity.

Uppity about someone pulling of a road for 10 mins (not parking) and getting charged £60-£100 for the privilege.

Did it on my phone, that my excuse.

Just doesn't seem reasonable to have to buy a ticket for £4 (for the sake of argument dont know what the charge was) for 10 minutes not in parking bay looking at a map. Just in rush pulled (not in bay) in checked map qued to get out. They don't have proof he parked he could of driven round for 10 minutes!

On the same basis you could enter its very busy not find a space in 10/12 mins exit and get a bill just for driving round and trying to find a space.

ANPR should be for police and government use not barry bodge parking companies or bandit bailiffs.

Edited by surveyor_101 on Tuesday 26th April 13:08

Edited by surveyor_101 on Tuesday 26th April 13:09

[surveyor_101]

PurpleMoonlight said:

Then the driver should not have used someone's private property for the purpose.

The legislation allows for the operator to claim the car park charge plus the cost of collection.

£60 seems reasonable.

The car park operator is not at fault here, you driver was.

You would pay £60 to £100 if you pulled in got stuck in a que to find there was no space just based on anpr?

In this case I don't agree however if they can answer the above points and prove the right to litigate on behalf of the landowner and the signage is clearn and complies with BPA Guidance I will advise accounts to pay the £60-£100.

However my experience suggests they won't, bother!

[surveyor_101]

Monkeylegend said:

Pretty obvious really

Yes unless your out to pick fault and not read my post in its entrirty.


For the cheaps seats HE pulled into the car park didn't park in a bag or exit the van, checked his map and quee to leave.

[surveyor_101]

PurpleMoonlight said:

Lucky that, they cost 5p these days which he probably wouldn't have paid either.

Just a moan you wanted then as what 5p and maps has to do with being charged for entering a car park deciding not to park and exciting, then being billed £100 for the privilege.

He spent much the same time as someone looking around for a space or reading the terms.

[surveyor_101]

Red Devil said:

As another poster has said that's a slightly different scenario. One for which a (non-binding) ruling has been made by a County Court Judge.
http://www.cornishguardian.co.uk/Couple-win-parkin...

However it underlines the basic flaw with any ANPR system. It can only prove an entry and exit: not that a parking event took place in between.

Percent setting case law, it gets better the respond should be good.

[surveyor_101]

1) I don't like these companies employing anpr and just firing tickets on the off chance someone will pee their pants and pay. It's like shooting fish in barrel.

As proved in the Cornwall case they have not established parking happened merely vehicle entered in a short period of time and exited.

2) they have not as yet proved breach of contract as they can't proved he parked they assume he did. It's a weak case and they are trying it on as in the Cornish case. The driver committed the breach yet they can't Identify him her it.

3) i am not convinced we can legally provide drivers details to some Barry bandit company or that we are legally obliged to. Our employee terms state we will pay and recover from fines received from the employee.

I am the commercial debt head and I am not paying these muppets £100 without proof he parked and breached their terms.

[surveyor_101]

Gallen said:

If your car wouldnt start or it's broken down, then you don't have to pay the Parking eye fine.

Yes there are a number of circumstances I can think of and the cornish case proves this anpr ticket anyone entering and exiting without paying for a ticket, scam as thats what it is, that Parking Eye are running is crazy. I am perhaps not surprised that some on here want to argue otherwise as they like a good arguement not matter how anti car enthusiast the topic.

I have now spoken to the driver and there were no spaces so he checked his map quickly and left, therefore he couldn't park in a mark bay and comply with the cont

[surveyor_101]

Appealed rejected no details why.

No response to my letter.

[surveyor_101]

Red Devil said:

Again, that doesn't surprise me. If it hasn't yet reached that stage the next step is likely to be a NtK invoking PoFA RK liability by the PPC. If you're determined to fight, it might pay you have have an off-thread exchange with S11Steve. Also consider pepipoo/MSE where you are more likely to receive actual help and support than on here.

sorry its parking eye as per the time of the post>

Yes they have just lost a case in cornwall of anpr used for 29 mins of driving round looking for a space.


BPA says 10 mins grace to park and 20 minutes to exit. I think 10 minutes to enter and exit without parking seems reasonable.

Have a post on MSE as well now

[surveyor_101]

Well having done some research they also lost a planning appeal as they only had 2 years to run this gravel pit with no marks bays as a carpark. It's down to be built on and the council don't want it as short term commuter parking. The proposal they have set forward is 5 hours £25 that's it. They are still running its as short term so in breach of planning anyway.

I have submitted a long popla appeal with help from mse, so fingers crossed. Having looked they are not complaint with the bpa on a number of issues and don't having planning for ANPR.

They had planning to run it short term for 2 years expiring in Jan 16. They were late appealing and the appeal has been thrown out.

[surveyor_101]

bad company said:

Why bother with POPLA? I would just invite them to sue.

Because there are many holes in their case and its costs them £27plus vat and any admin time they need to mount their case. Also if they do sue it would be asked why we didn't use the code they provided.

Also if you do some research Parking Eye often do sue and other than beavis they lose.

If everyone appealed their tickets and didn't pay their business model would fail in months.

[surveyor_101]

Gallen said:

As I said up there, if your vehicle is broken down then that's it.

I've been unlucky enough to have it happen to me twice. On both accounts it was cancelled there and then.

- first time with invoice for faulty key and repair
- second time with invoice from recovery

G.

van didn't breakdown, no invoices to prove that, however van didn't park. I doubt parking eye would cancel it even if there was evidence of a breakdown. They like going legal as with the beavis case.

Parking Eye are notorious for not accepting appeals, they have stated why they denied ours or responded to my letter.

I had a ticket a couple of months ago from horizon and my first letter (similar to the one sent on this one) got it canceled in 10 days.

[surveyor_101]

bad company said:

I agree with what you say but it would cost them more than £27 to take you to the County Court. Having said that as a business you would not be able to have the case transferred to your local Court.

Don't think I can convince my the directors to go to county court over £100 parking fine.

[surveyor_101]

Chrisgr31 said:

and if people didnt abuse privately owned car parks then their business model would fail

I will answer that.

Not true as a lot of tickets are issued from anpr when abuse may not have occurred all together.

people who drop people back to cars getting tickets and they don't back down. They just lost a case in cornwall for someone who circled a ram carpark and left.

So yes some abuse but these guys just shoot everyone a ticket off the anpr.

[surveyor_101]

UPDATE

won at POPLA appeal parking eye are notorious at this site but their are 6/7 holes in their bpa compliance so they lost on lack of land owner authority. Parking eye aren't in contract with the land owner and they have a contract with an agent elite parking scumbags Ltd.j

They have two different contracts and present different ones at different appeals for the same site! Fraud maybe ?Also the signage evidence to popla you can drive a bus through. They show a site plan with signs that aren't all on the photos and one photo says sign removed on it!

They are clearly chancers

[surveyor_101]

johnfm said:

You use lawyers to draft a POPLA appeal?

Did my appeal myself using MSE.

Not hard they lose appeals all the time it's a calculated risk as their paperwork is full of holes Parking eye take just hoping you will back down at some point. It's cost them a load of admin and £27 to appeal to popla our ticket and everyone did appeal their business model would fail and or they would start having to stop defrauding people and comply with BPA regs which they only join to get access to dvla data.

[surveyor_101]

blueg33 said:

Surveyor, was you appeal handled by Wright Hassall? I have a stayed appeal that is being handled by them, my grounds are signage and land owner authority

No did the appeal and evidence comments myself and Mark Yates was the POPLA Ass!