Parking Eye Could Be Bankrupted

[bad company]

Well apparently this class action has the potential:-

https://casehub.com/blog/parking-eye-civil-claims-...

[TooMany2cvs]

bad company said:

Well apparently this class action has the potential:-

https://casehub.com/blog/parking-eye-civil-claims-...

There's one hell of a lot of "could" and "might" and "if" in there.

But, basically, it boils down to some people have had default CCJs registered against them, because there was no way to get in contact with them when they parked where they shouldn't, because the V5C for their car had the wrong address on it.

And, apparently, it's PE's fault that those people hadn't told DVLA their right address.

Oh, then multiply that made-up number of people by a made-up amount based on an award in a 20yo, completely and utterly different case, heard in Scotland.

...and that's all according to the sales blurb for the solicitors bringing the class action...

Somehow, I don't think PE's directors will lose too much sleep over it.

[rich888]

TooMany2cvs said:

bad company said:

Well apparently this class action has the potential:-

https://casehub.com/blog/parking-eye-civil-claims-...

There's one hell of a lot of "could" and "might" and "if" in there.

But, basically, it boils down to some people have had default CCJs registered against them, because there was no way to get in contact with them when they parked where they shouldn't, because the V5C for their car had the wrong address on it.

And, apparently, it's PE's fault that those people hadn't told DVLA their right address.

Oh, then multiply that made-up number of people by a made-up amount based on an award in a 20yo, completely and utterly different case, heard in Scotland.

...and that's all according to the sales blurb for the solicitors bringing the class action...

Somehow, I don't think PE's directors will lose too much sleep over it.

Depends upon whether Parking Eye have an overdraft and the bank gets wind of this, then gets cold feet, and pulls the overdraft facility with immediate effect.

[bad company]

TooMany2cvs said:

There's one hell of a lot of "could" and "might" and "if" in there.

But, basically, it boils down to some people have had default CCJs registered against them, because there was no way to get in contact with them when they parked where they shouldn't, because the V5C for their car had the wrong address on it.

And, apparently, it's PE's fault that those people hadn't told DVLA their right address.

Oh, then multiply that made-up number of people by a made-up amount based on an award in a 20yo, completely and utterly different case, heard in Scotland.

...and that's all according to the sales blurb for the solicitors bringing the class action...

Somehow, I don't think PE's directors will lose too much sleep over it.

No it's not PE's fault if the DVLA gave them out of date addresses BUT it is their responsibility to get the right address for legal action.

[elanfan]

And all they'd do is shut down, buy back the assets for £1 and start up as Parking Eye 2017 Ltd.

Yes it'll shaft them but it won't stop them.

[Dogwatch]

rich888 said:

Depends upon whether Parking Eye have an overdraft and the bank gets wind of this, then gets cold feet, and pulls the overdraft facility with immediate effect.

Put the business into administration and start up Parking Ear the next day. No prob.

[rich888]

Dogwatch said:

rich888 said:

Depends upon whether Parking Eye have an overdraft and the bank gets wind of this, then gets cold feet, and pulls the overdraft facility with immediate effect.

Put the business into administration and start up Parking Ear the next day. No prob.

Depends who moves quicker, the directors putting the company into liquidation or the bank?

[Swoxy]

Parking Eye is owned by Capita.

[TooMany2cvs]

bad company said:

No it's not PE's fault if the DVLA gave them out of date addresses BUT it is their responsibility to get the right address for legal action.

The RK has a legal requirement, punishable by a fine of up to £1,000, to make sure DVLA have the right address. Is it reasonable for PE to assume the address that DVLA provide them with is a valid one for the registered keeper of the vehicle? I suspect there's probably a precedent to say that it is.

[Boosted LS1]

^ I doubt it. If I wanted to send you a summons it would be my responsibility to send it to your home address, not rely on somebody else with a database.

[bad company]

Boosted LS1 said:

^ I doubt it. If I wanted to send you a summons it would be my responsibility to send it to your home address, not rely on somebody else with a database.

Correct. If the summons went to the wrong address it would be fairly straightforward to get any judgement set aside.

[TooMany2cvs]

bad company said:

Boosted LS1 said:

^ I doubt it. If I wanted to send you a summons it would be my responsibility to send it to your home address, not rely on somebody else with a database.

Correct. If the summons went to the wrong address it would be fairly straightforward to get any judgement set aside.

So nothing for the recipients of those CCJs to sue over, then. They can just get the judgements set aside.

[bad company]

TooMany2cvs said:

bad company said:

Boosted LS1 said:

^ I doubt it. If I wanted to send you a summons it would be my responsibility to send it to your home address, not rely on somebody else with a database.

Correct. If the summons went to the wrong address it would be fairly straightforward to get any judgement set aside.

So nothing for the recipients of those CCJs to sue over, then. They can just get the judgements set aside.

They can get the judgements set aside if the summons was served at the wrong address. Can they then sue for damages? That is the question.

[TooMany2cvs]

bad company said:

TooMany2cvs said:

bad company said:

Boosted LS1 said:

^ I doubt it. If I wanted to send you a summons it would be my responsibility to send it to your home address, not rely on somebody else with a database.

Correct. If the summons went to the wrong address it would be fairly straightforward to get any judgement set aside.

So nothing for the recipients of those CCJs to sue over, then. They can just get the judgements set aside.

They can get the judgements set aside if the summons was served at the wrong address. Can they then sue for damages? That is the question.

If the judgement's been set aside, there's no damage.

[bad company]

TooMany2cvs said:

bad company said:

TooMany2cvs said:

bad company said:

Boosted LS1 said:

^ I doubt it. If I wanted to send you a summons it would be my responsibility to send it to your home address, not rely on somebody else with a database.

Correct. If the summons went to the wrong address it would be fairly straightforward to get any judgement set aside.

So nothing for the recipients of those CCJs to sue over, then. They can just get the judgements set aside.

They can get the judgements set aside if the summons was served at the wrong address. Can they then sue for damages? That is the question.

If the judgement's been set aside, there's no damage.

That's it then. Stop the whole action because Mr cvs says there is no damage.

[TooMany2cvs]

bad company said:

TooMany2cvs said:

bad company said:

TooMany2cvs said:

bad company said:

Boosted LS1 said:

^ I doubt it. If I wanted to send you a summons it would be my responsibility to send it to your home address, not rely on somebody else with a database.

Correct. If the summons went to the wrong address it would be fairly straightforward to get any judgement set aside.

So nothing for the recipients of those CCJs to sue over, then. They can just get the judgements set aside.

They can get the judgements set aside if the summons was served at the wrong address. Can they then sue for damages? That is the question.

If the judgement's been set aside, there's no damage.

That's it then. Stop the whole action because Mr cvs says there is no damage.

There's a judgement. As soon as it's discovered, it's removed. What damage is there?

[hedgefinder]

TooMany2cvs said:

There's a judgement. As soon as it's discovered, it's removed. What damage is there?

who are you to know?
What if someone has a mortgage application refused or something worse - all possible with a CCJ on your record that you dont know about......

[TooMany2cvs]

hedgefinder said:

TooMany2cvs said:

There's a judgement. As soon as it's discovered, it's removed. What damage is there?

who are you to know?
What if someone has a mortgage application refused or something worse - all possible with a CCJ on your record that you dont know about......

But as soon as the CCJ was discovered, it was removed.

[bad company]

TooMany2cvs said:

hedgefinder said:

TooMany2cvs said:

There's a judgement. As soon as it's discovered, it's removed. What damage is there?

who are you to know?
What if someone has a mortgage application refused or something worse - all possible with a CCJ on your record that you dont know about......

But as soon as the CCJ was discovered, it was removed.

What about the damage that might have been caused while the CCJ was still in place?

[surveyor_101]

I am sorry but these guys don't do business as a decent parking company. I have seen a ton of evidence they constantly breach their industry body BPA code. Firing £100 tickets for 14 min visits to their carpark snitch no proof they park. Or 7 mins overstays in 2hr free. A lot of their tickets aren't complaint with the legislation yet they destroy people's credit files on a whim.

Bpa state 20 min total grace time should be allowed for arrival and departure yet they insist on ticketing. I ahve heard there system is almost completely automated and design to get to county court notice.

I have a poplar appeal in and I have learned prior to April they didn't even have a contract to act for the land owner in my companies case so there ticket will almost certainly be canceled by popla as some who was ticketed in March also had had theirs.