Hi

I've received a 'letter before county court claim' from ParkingEye regarding an unpaid ticket and I would like your opinion and advice please. I like to think it's just scare tactics but I want to be sure.

I parked on a Tesco car park, supposedly overstayed (3 hours on a 2 hour max stay. I disputed the ticket with a POPLA template I found here that at CAG that said I don't acknowledge the debt, don't have to name the driver, and that I will defend myself at POPLA if need be. This has worked the other times I've had tickets but this time I've received a new and different response.

In bold, capital letters it states 'letter before county court claim' and straight away this just screams 'we're trying to scare you'. The letter notes when and where I was caught by their cameras and that the charge was for breach of contract and that when they rejected my appeal I had 28 days to lodge an appeal with POPLA and that as I didn't appeal, the ticket must be paid. To be fair, I thought I only had to appeal to POPLA when PE took me to POPLA (and I was there to defend myself - not preempt my defence by writing to POPLA myself).

Next it details how to contact PE to make payment within 30 days and that if further action is required and court proceedings are issued then costs will be incurred - including £50 solicitor's costs and £25 court claim issue fee - and that no costs have been added at this stage. I think this is scare mongering because AFAIK extra costs cannot be added and that £50 wouldn't even cost solicitor costs anyway.

The final paragraph is to draw my attention to the Supreme Court's decision 'concerning the value of PE's Parking Charges and the judgement granted in PE's favour, delivers a binding precedent in respect of the sum sought as the Supreme Court found that the Parking Charge was set at a reasonable amount'. On the flip side was further details about a judgement on 4th Nov 2015 in PE vs Barry Beavis, dismissing his appeal on both grounds, and that the Supreme Cour found that the Parking Charge issued was neither unfair nor penal; that the Court agreed with the analysis proffered by HHJ Moloney and the Court of Appeal that £85 was neither extravagant or unconscionable; and that this judgement is binding upon all lower courts and independent appeals services.

The remaining pages of the letter includes a 7 point 'further information (see screenshot), info on where to get debt advice and how to flll in the reply form, the reply form itelf which inludes options such as 'I owe the debt', ' I owe some but all of it', 'I dispute the debt', 'I will pay now'. 'I need more documents/information', and a financial statement form.

Your advice is much appreciated.

You do need to reply to a Letter Before Claim, as sending it is the step before starting County Court action. The best thing is to give PE a torrent of abuse so they know it would be a battle to win in court (often at this point they give up and go after some other mug who doesn't fight back).

The experts will be on in the morning to help. In the meantime could you upload all the correspondence you've had from PE right from the start (obviously with all personal details removed)? They often mess up the paperwork and the experts will be able to pick holes in their drivel.

Did you name yourself as the driver in the POPLA appeal? We need pictures of the signage on the entry to the car park and within.

please complete this

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?462118-Have-you-received-a-Parking-Ticket-(1-Viewing)-nbsp

post up the NTK

and your appeal and their reply

one multipage PDF only please

read upload

I did not name myself as the driver, I said I was under no obligation to name the driver. I can post the letter and pics of the signage but I don't think I have copies of all the correspondence. The POPLA was sent via PE's online appeal form and I probably threw away their previous letters after they went quiet

do the link

we will need to know a lot more about the event itself, where, when, what correspondence you received and when that arrived, pictures of the entrance to the land, pictures of the signage etc.

As for the court threat letter, they dont use solicitors so that is an inflated cost they are threatening you with. As for pay up within 30 days? if they were serious they wouldnt give you that long but it does give you plenty of time to get your ammunition gathered around you.

Why were you there for 3 hours? Is it something the store can be forced to help you with?

Just trying to upload what docs I have but am confused. dx100 mentioned uploading a pdf but the link I was provided only asks for a pdf if the ticket was a windscreen ticket (point 2).

????

if you want to post any docs up

always use pdf to do so.

read upload/

dx

Apologies for the delay but I've been trying to find all previous correspondence but I don't have any so the history is as follows:

1) they sent me an NTK

2) I appealed on their website

3) they rejected my appeal

4) they eventually wrote to me to say the debt is still outstanding

5) I ignored the letter

6) they eventually sent this letter before county court action

I now attach the 10 page letter I got.

had to remove yo upload as you've left ref numbers showing

but we don't need to see the LBC anyway as we know what they look like anyway

its a std form.

can you please look at the following link:

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?462118-Have-you-received-a-Parking-Ticket-(1-Viewing)-nbsp

select the questions in the ANPR section

copy and paste them back here to a new msg box:

then answer each question at its end with the required info before you hit the post quick reply button.

we will need a PDF copy of the NTK you got with the photos [both sides please]

and

a copy of your appeal please

make sure you redact things PROPERLY, leave times and dates please

use ONE multipage PDF only

read upload

..............

Date of the infringement 16.09.2018

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] I don't know as I don't have the NTK anymore

3 Date received I don't know when I got the NTK but the Letter Before County Claim was dated 02.01.2019

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [y/n?] I don't know

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? I don't know

6 Have you appealed? {y/n?] post up your appeal]Yes. I posted the standard CAG appeal via the online appeal process, as I mentioned in my OP

Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up I received a standard rejection of appeal - as I have received in the past and which has usually made the company go away - that said they're in their right to charge me as detailed in their signage Ts and Cs

7 Who is the parking company? Parking Eye

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Woodfield Retail Park - Bury

For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under.BPA

I don't have the NTK so cannot post anything except the Letter Before County Court.

As I said before, it's doubtful I stayed in excess of 3 hours as I just pop to Tesco to do a bit of shopping every few days and even if I wanted to potter around town, I don't take anywhere near 3 hours not even at Christmas, so I'm pretty sure they inadvertently clocked me returning a little bit later on in the day - without realising I'd left already - and assumed I'd been there the full 3 hours.

However, things have since taken a more sinister turn as I've received 2 further parking notices in the past week

- for the same retail park

- but coming from CP Plus (who I assume have taken over from Parking Eye).

These are just 3 days apart, one stating a stay of 5 1/2 hour and the other

- received today

- for a whopping 14 1/2 hours and these are definitely clocking me for separate visits to the retail park.

Your advice on handling these, too, is appreciated.

Unlike Parking Eye, who only allow 2 hours free parking, CP Plus signage (that I photographed today and will upload here) allows 3 hours free parking but still, I was never there for 5.5 nor 14.5 hours and I think they are targeting me on purpose because I've swatted Parking Eye away on previous occasions.

Regarding the Parking Eye infringement on 16th September 2018 they claim to have photographic evidence capturing me entering and leaving 3.5 hours apart.

Funnily enough, their website is allowing me to appeal so should I enter the standard CAG 'I am the registered keeper, am under no obligation to name the driver, do not recognise the charge, require you to delete the charge, will take my case to POPLA if need be' or what?

Miss J - Parking Signage.pdf

you need to start a new thread for EACH NTK/ticket you have received

and

fill out as in page 11 the std link that you have above for each one too.

there is no std cab appeal, we never recommend appealing unless specifically told to do so on your thread.

as for this thread

it looks like you've hit the nail on the head and its a caase of double dipping.

which is entry of one visit, exit of a later one.

well just because PE's ANPR camera system is so rubbish it cant work that out

that's not your problem.

so time for a snotty letter to them in reply to the PAP letter of claim

pointing out how useless their ANPR system is.

have you looked for similar PE double dipping threads?

have you looked for other threads here at the same car park?

have you checked with the relevant council that their signs and ANPR equipment and poles have current planning permission?

have you checked they have a paid up contract with the land owners that enables them to issue claims upon their behalf?

Thank for the heads-up re one ticket per thread.

This is the 'standard' CAG response that I was told to send whenever I get a NTK:

'As RK I am not liable for this charge.

Cancel this charge or alternatively issue a valid code for POPLA.

At POPLA I shall be demanding a full breakdown of the genuine pre estimate of loss that this charge must represent.

I am under no obligation to name the driver of the vehicle at the time of the event.

No further correspondence will be entered into.'

What is a PAP?

How do I fight on the basis that their ANPR is crap without them thinking I'm just blagging and without them coming back with 'our ANPR system never makes mistakes' thus getting nowhere in this dispute?

If I send said snotty letter - is it going to be adequate considering the LBC they sent? Should I also point out they can't charge solicitor fees?

I haven't looked at similar double-dipping and same car park threads (but I will) and I have no idea how to check with the land owners and the council re: paid-up contracts and panning permission so advice on how to do that is appreciated.

where were you on this thread told to send the blue text?

pap is pre action protocol re:LBC - the letter you got.

as I said you ring the relevant council to check planning permission.....or poss on their webportal? most have a planning section

as for the snotty letter

I think there are quite a few here already.

use the search CAG box of the Top redtoolbar.

try

double dipping ericbrother

or words like that.

or snotty letter ericbrother

the more threads you read the stronger we become

Plus, do you have proof you were elsewhere during the three double dipping events? A single receipt or use of a bank card would be great.

Or at work.

Or with friends who would be witnesses.

It's highly unlikely the fleecers would be so stupid as to take you to court once they receive the snotty letter that lets them know their crap ANPR cameras have been sussed, but the more ammo you have the better.

for starters they know thier camera system isnt fit for purpose, they have been told this enough times and by courts as well. Now do you have any proof or witnesses to you being elsewhere? If so the response to their letter is simple.

"Dear sirs, there was no breach of contract because your useless recording system has missed out half of the events and conjoined the others to create a story you know full well is not true. I have evidence and witness to show the vehicle was elseqwhere between the times you claim is a single event and your greed seems to blind you from seeing anything other than pound signs.

If you want to go to court for "double dipping" as the term is commonly called then by all means I will accept your cheque for my costs as easy money. Other than that I suggest that you go and crawl back into the woodwork and let us honest people get on with their days"

that should do it. use their ref but dont add anything else and never explain things in detail. Dont expect an apology and you are also unlikely to hear any more from them as they cant admit they are as bad as being nothing but chancers and fleecers