Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • love the extra £1000 charge for confidentialy there BF   Also OP even if they don't offer OOC it doesn't mean your claim isn't good. I had 3 against EVRi that were heard over the last 3 weeks. They sent me emails asking me to discontinue as I wouldn't win. Went infront of a judge and won all 3.    Just remember the law is on your side. The judges will be aware of this.   Where you can its important to try to point out at the hearing the specific part of the contract they breached. I found this was very helpful and the Judge made reference to it when they gave their judgements and it seemed this was pretty important as once you have identified a specific breach the matter turns straight to liability. From there its a case of pointing out the unlawfullness of their insurance and then that should be it.
    • I know dx and thanks again for yours and others help. I was 99.999% certain last payment was over six years ago if not longer.  👍
    • Paragraph 23 – "standard industry practice" – put this in bold type. They are stupid to rely on this and we might as well carry on emphasising how stupid they are. I wonder why they could even have begun to think some kind of compelling argument – "the other boys do it so I do it as well…" Same with paragraph 26   Paragraph 45 – The Defendants have so far been unable to produce any judgements at any level which disagree with the three judgements…  …court, but I would respectfully request…   Just the few amendments above – and I think it's fine. I think you should stick to the format that you are using. This has been used lots of times and has even been applauded by judges for being meticulous and clear. You aren't a professional. Nobody is expecting professional standards and although it's important that you understand exactly what you are doing – you don't really want to come over to the judge that you have done this kind of thing before. As a litigant in person you get a certain licence/leeway from judges and that is helpful to you – especially if you are facing a professional advocate. The way this is laid out is far clearer than the mess that you will get from EVRi. Quite frankly they undermine their own credibility by trying to say that they should win simply because it is "standard industry practice". It wouldn't at all surprise me if EVRi make you a last moment offer of the entire value of your claim partly to avoid judgement and also partly to avoid the embarrassment of having this kind of rubbish exposed in court. If they do happen to do that, then you should make sure that they pay everything. If they suddenly make you an out-of-court offer and this means that they are worried that they are going to lose and so you must make sure that you get every penny – interest, costs – everything you claimed. Finally, if they do make you an out-of-court offer they will try to sign you up to a confidentiality agreement. The answer to that is absolutely – No. It's not part of the claim and if they want to settle then they settle the claim as it stands and don't try add anything on. If they want confidentiality then that will cost an extra £1000. If they don't like it then they can go do the other thing. Once you have made the amendments suggested above – it should be the final version. court,. I don't think we are going to make any more changes. Your next job good to make sure that you are completely familiar with it all. That you understand the arguments. Have you made a court familiarisation visit?
    • just type no need to keep hitting quote... as has already been said, they use their own criteria. if a person is not stated as linked to you on your file then no cant hurt you. not all creditors use every CRA provider, there are only 3 main credit file providers mind, the rest are just 3rd party data sharers. if you already have revolving credit on your file there is no need to apply for anything just 'because' you need to show you can handle money. if you have bank account(s) and a mortgage which you are servicing (paying) then nothing more can improve your score, despite what these 'scam' sites claiml  its all a CON!!  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 160 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Parking Charge Notice From Parking Eye


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4511 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi all, new to the forum no doubt like many others when they do a google search for advice on parking tickets!

 

I've today received a parking charge notice from Parking Eye, requesting payment of £80 or £50 if paid in next 14 days.

 

They have sent the notice to me as the registered keeper, and I was driving, although obviously the letter doesn't offer any proof of this but photographic evidence may!

 

The charge is for parking in B&Q Crewe before hoping on the train to Manchester, so was over the 3 hour limit by 4 hours (09:50 til 16:59).

 

I accept that it was me driving, I'd also accept that I was parked there that long, but its not a busy car park on a weekend (it was Saturday) and I'm reluctant to pay such a large charge for very little.

 

What would you suggest I do, I don't really want to keep receiving letters from them, nor from any solicitors, and certainly don't want a black mark against my name/credit, or someone turning up at the door.

 

If I ignore will they really go away, or just increase the charge and eventually take it to court.

 

I have no financial problems, I could pay it to avoid hassle, but thats not really the point is it? I just can't spend much time on this, as I'm busy enough already!

 

Please help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 74
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Private companies cannot issue 'fines'. You have just received an unenforcable invoice.

 

It's a [problem].

 

• do not pay

• do not contact them

ignore all letters you receive, no matter how threatening

ignore all their lies about court costs, CCJs and owner liability

• they will go away after 5 or 6 letters

• they will not go to court

 

These companies make their money by scaring people into paying when they don't have to. If they can scare 50% of people into paying with a few letters, it's a good business to be in.

 

Parking Eye are well known here. They just send a few letters and then give up.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So with such a bad reputation why do companies as large as B&Q employ their services?

 

What makes companies like these any different from council owed parking companies conducting the same practises?

 

I have no problem with paying for the use of their car park, after all, I did use it to get a train elsewhere, and was over their allowed time by 4 hours, but I'd prefer a reasonable charge, say of £10 (what it would have cost me to park in the train station car park or in manchester itself), therefore I'm not willing to pay £50!

 

In their letter they have used the following words/wording which I'd class as either intimidation, or giving the illusion of legal:

 

"You are required to pay..."

"Breach of the terms and conditions..."

"We are happy to provide parking facilities for legitimate customers..."

"legal proceedings may be issued against you..."

"Your possessions being seized"

"If you are unable to pay the debt..."

 

.

Edited by ian-d
Link to post
Share on other sites

ian-d

 

The £60 may not be that much to you but it is very important to Parking Eye. Multiplied by the number of tickets by the number of different sites, it is a multi million pound business. They do not have the statutory powers that councils have so try to compensate by aping the council paperwork and add to the mix by making all sorts of outrageous claims of their own.

 

Their claims have no basis in law but that in itself will not stop them making them. You have a simple choice, either accept the minor annoyance of receiving 5 or 6 letters which you don't have to answer or pay a completely unjustified £60 to a bunch of latter day dick turpins.

 

Remember any "moral" issues you may have would be with B&Q not Parking Eye. It is not Parking Eye's store, it is not their land, why should they benefit at all?

Link to post
Share on other sites

haha, was wondering what you were talking about before removing it :)

 

Well I guess I'll leave it be then, see how many letters they send me, here's hoping no one has ever been taken to court. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

So with such a bad reputation why do companies as large as B&Q employ their services?

 

What makes companies like these any different from council owed parking companies conducting the same practises?

 

Ignorance or profiteering usually. B&Q either won't have a clue about the legality of the ticketing system, or they know full well and are happy to take a cut out of each ticket.

 

As well as raking in their ill gotten gains, private parking companies pitch to gain new business and will present themselves as solving all your car parking problems. They usually gloss over the legality of charging penalties, or twist the law to make themselves sound legit.

 

The Co-op are probably the worst. Despite their 'ethical' image, they love to employ parking companies who rip people off.

 

As for local authorities, they have statutes in law which legitimately allows them to charge fines.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Ian and welcome,

 

You could always wait until they spend their £2.50 with the DVLA to get the registered keepers details, and then simply send them a letter telling them, 'to take the matter up with the driver'. Information which of course you are not obliged to provide.

regards

Please remember our troops, fighting and dying in our name. God protect them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I didn't go anything in the end and no surprises have not heard from them, I atleast expected a second letter to feel the satisfaction of knowing they've wasted more money pursuing me.

 

Is it still a little early to expect nothing more from them (3 weeks) or can I look forward to the second letter soon? ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

It was 6 months between the ticket and the first letter with the PPC I'm dealing with at the moment.

 

Wow! And there was me thinking that as it is 14 weeks since I got my invoice and still no "Letter to RK" that mine had died an instant death. Seems I have a fair few weeks to wait as yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mine was from one of these 'buy-it-yourself ticketing schemes'. You pay £99 for some tickets, dodgy signage and fraudulent yellow PVC envelopes and send the details of who you've caught to the parking company. Then you get a cut of any tickets that pay up.

 

The man who was playing traffic warden must have been slow to get his tickets in, in my case!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, they finally got in touch, but not ParkingEye, it's a letter from CCSCollect, requesting that I must pay the debt immediately, and that it's now £110.

 

They go on to say that they may pursue this matter through the appropriate legal channels, and that if I ignore them, a bailiff may attend your address, to remove goods.

 

Is that still a 'run-of-the-mill' response? Still ignore then?

Link to post
Share on other sites

some of us want to get real court papers from one of these outfits....

Your bang on there Lamma, I want Simplex to take me to court, oh what fun it would be, especailly after the Dept Collectors letter I recevied today! :)

 

Ian-d, it might be worth you reading my experiences, mine started in Mar 08, still ongoing, but nothing at all for me to worry about.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, they finally got in touch, but not ParkingEye, it's a letter from CCSCollect, requesting that I must pay the debt immediately, and that it's now £110.

 

They go on to say that they may pursue this matter through the appropriate legal channels, and that if I ignore them, a bailiff may attend your address, to remove goods.

 

Is that still a 'run-of-the-mill' response? Still ignore then?

 

Yes, it is completely run of the mill, continue to ignore everything short of actual court papers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

seeing a lot more of these clearly deliberately misleading letters now. I wonder of the PPC hit rate is falling ( :) ) and they are getting so desperate that they sinking even further into unlawfulness ? There are a lot of SUN readers aren't there ? so a couple of million ( ? ) extra people just found out about the PPC 'game'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Heyup Ian D, I'm in exactly the same boat chap, awaiting my 3rd installment of hilarity from Parking Eye or CCS Collect even.

Looking at the CCS Collect website I notice the wording "our pursuasive techniques offer excellent results" which tends to suggest they will lean on you with lots of scary threats and warnings.

 

End result ? UNLESS its an official court summons that comes through the door it's all bull**** in the breeze...

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

Has anything else happened since you got the notices, have they given up??

 

I got one of these notices from Parking Eye in January... knowing it was a mistake with their number plate system (seen me going in one day, coming out another, assumed I'd been there 20 hours?!) I rang them to let them know they'd made a mistake, and to check their video, they would see me leaving 2 minutes after entering each time (drive through coffee from McDonalds in moto services).

 

But no - they took up until yesterday to send me another letter, saying I now owe them £50 more than before, and it's non-negotiable.. I rang their line to have a go, and got into an arguement with the rude woman on the phone about it, who said I could always write in with evidence.

 

Tomorrow I'm sending them a letter, with 2 witness statements and some video footage of my car in the company carpark from the time they claim to have had me in their carpark (I work for a security camera company ironically, so the video evidence is time-stamped and archived!!), sending a duplicate letter to moto and mcdonalds, letting them know I've bought a coffee machine and thermos for £100 instead of paying a bogus fine, so they've lost custom)... the letter is going to be closing with how I will happily go to court over this, and watchdog, but I won't be replying or responding to anything less than a court summons after this letter, bar an apology.

 

Does anybody see any problem with this reply? I know it sounds like alot of effort, but if I don't do it I know it will annoy me everyday until the debt collection agencies give up... hilariously, they are still sending these letters to my old address, which I moved from 3 months ago! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

STOP !!!

Do not write in - that is exactly what they want you to do. Its a mail scan, do NOT play along. just ignore them and they will go away after sending some (unlawful) letters. Have a read on here about Parking eyes and PPCs in general.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tomorrow I'm sending them a letter, with 2 witness statements and some video footage of my car in the company carpark from the time they claim to have had me in their carpark (I work for a security camera company ironically, so the video evidence is time-stamped and archived!!), sending a duplicate letter to moto and mcdonalds, letting them know I've bought a coffee machine and thermos for £100 instead of paying a bogus fine, so they've lost custom)... the letter is going to be closing with how I will happily go to court over this, and watchdog, but I won't be replying or responding to anything less than a court summons after this letter, bar an apology.

 

Does anybody see any problem with this reply? I know it sounds like alot of effort, but if I don't do it I know it will annoy me everyday until the debt collection agencies give up... hilariously, they are still sending these letters to my old address, which I moved from 3 months ago! :)

 

I was going to suggest you shouldn't bother, but you seem quite confident to be able to handle the twaddle they will send you afterwards. (you do realise I assume even this documented evidence is probably still going to result in an "appeal unsuccessful" reply?)

 

The letter to McDonalds is good though as well. It will never get anywhere near court (unfortunately)

Link to post
Share on other sites

hilariously, they are still sending these letters to my old address, which I moved from 3 months ago! :)

 

btw, they will have got this address from the DVLA. Have you updated the DVLA with your new address? Not having done so could be a bigger problem for you than this stupid PPC invoice if, for example, you get flashed by a speed camera and miss a "real" PCN being sent to your old address.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...