terrier82
-
Posts
23 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Post article
CAGMag
Blogs
Keywords
Everything posted by terrier82
-
Now with the benefit of hindsight I should have objected to the planning and delayed it if possible till after the court date, I thought the retrospective planning at the time this was working in my favour to prove they should of had it, think I'll have to bow out of the appeal to much of a financial risk, I gave it my best shot and nearly got them, thanks for all your help guys especially ericsbrother
-
Thanks for the reply much appreciated, I have to pay my bill by this Friday (14 days after) torn what to do, if I won would I be able to reclaim solicitor costs on my side?
-
Apologies for the brief info , ericsbrother has more or less summed it up, because planning can be retrospective this means the sign is as legitimate as it would be if prior permission was granted, the sticking point for me as ericsbrother quite rightly points out the law is not retrospective the crime has been committed it can't be undone, I think the judge has just thought of it as a planning permission issue without any criminal activity however I did point out regulation 30 of the town and country plannining regulations, which she googled and said this relates to advertisements, which obviously it is, but she said it in away to discount it , I replied this is what they applied for in retrospect she then seemed to acknowledge it, I did want to probe further into that but as she said her view she wrapped it up quickly, for information as we'll the advocate did not have the evidence pack I sent Parking eye (recorded delivery) he was totally in the dark he had no idea that it was about planning permission, was going off the popla appeal that [pardon the pun] in retrospect was my naivety to that there would be empathy or morals to the corrupt private parking industry, please see below link which has got me wondering? Should I appeal what would be my financial exposure if I lost? Assuming I would need to appoint a solicitor ? http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/08/parkingeye-discontinue-two-cases.html
-
Sorry not there true costs, but this was as much as they could claim for, so it cost them more money in the end
-
Yes they did £200 to pay
-
Lost in court today, said due to the retrospective application making it legal !
-
Just got a letter from parking eye saying an advocate will be at the court hearing (LPC law) to minimise cost to me when they have to claim back, is this pretty standard?
-
Advertisement Consent is a breach of the law ?
-
They definitely haven't got planning permission for the signs meter and anpr including advertisement consent for the signs, going to court 11th of next month, retrospective permission was granted about year after the parking incident,this was only enforced by the council after my enquiries, has there been a case won on these grounds?
-
I received the attached from parking eye enforcement team and also they sent to the county court, what is the view on this? peye1.pdf peye2.pdf
-
Thanks I completely agree
-
Put defend in full and counterclaim, got a questionnaire from the court asking if I would be prepared to mediate should I do that or let it go the full way?
-
Council have just confirmed there is current enforcement, enforcement case number is 16/0217/EWKS
-
Hi, it is the N1 the date at the top right is 16 May, I have responded on line and have said to defend in full and have been given additional time to gather evidence, POC Claim for monies outstanding from the defendant, in relation to parking charge, issued 19/09/15 for parking on private land in breach of the terms and conditions (the contract) parkingeyes automated number plate recognition system, monitoring dovecot street stockton captured vehicle reg entering and leaving the car park, parking without purchasing a valid paid parking ticket, the signage which is clearly displayed art the entrance and throughout the site, states this is private land, is managed by parking eye and is a paid parking site, along with other T+C's by which those who park on site agree to be bound, in accordance with the T+C's set out in the signage, the parking charge became payable, the defendant previously had their appeal rejected by popla the indepedant service for parking on private land Amount claimed £100 Court Fee £25 Legal representative costs £50 Cheers Thanks in advance
-
I wrote Parking eye a letter and attached correspondence from the council saying no planning in place, they have sent county court papers now and refer to the lost POPLA appeal?
-
Thanks for your help turns out no planning permission for the signage, anpr or the meter itself !
-
I got this reply from the council today, sounds like the condition is not met yet sounds a bit vague? Thank you for your enquiry regarding the car park at Dovecot Street in Stockton. Planning permission has been granted for the permanent use of the site as a car park area (which included the parking meter and signage) in September 2014 (14/2033/FUL). A condition was attached to the permission regarding the completion of works to the former wall of the Brunswick Chapel with details to be submitted to the Local Authority for approval. I understand that the applicant has been in touch regarding the proposed works to the wall.
-
Thank you Hi, I rang the local council today and they said, it didn't need PP with it being private land?
-
I can't find this, what Is the title ?
-
Thanks for your help will cheers
-
Any ideas?
-
Hi, Thanks for the reply, will have a look around, it is parking eye who manage the car park. more info: Please see attached ticket showing that I did pay £2.70 on the day.
-
Hi Just looking for some advice on below, if anyone can help? I have just recently received the below from appealing to POPLA, I still have the ticket with £2.70 printed on the ticket, the ticket only displays the arrival time, there was parking tariffs on the sign but believed that this would pro rata, ie additional 70p, would more than cover the additional 28mins over the £2 for 2 hours. The operator has provided me with photographic evidence of the appellant’s vehicle entering the Dovecot Street Car Park at 13:27 and exited at 15:55 for a stay totalling 2 hours and 28 minutes. The operator has provided a system print out, which shows that the appellant purchased a two hours parking time at 13:29. The operator has provided photographs of the signage that is located at the site. The signage states that “Parking Tariffs Apply …Failure to comply with the terms & conditions will result in a Parking Charge of £100”. The appellant states that he paid £2.70 and purchased a ticket. He states that there were two parking tariffs available to him, one tariff was two hours for £2 and the next option was four hours for £3. He states that as he paid £2.70 he is entitled to more than two hours. However, by the appellant’s own admission, he has acknowledged that the two tariffs available to him were two hours for £2 and four hours for £3. The appellant does not have the option to pay alternate prices in order to receive altered parking time. Therefore, paying £2.70 would allow him to park at the site for two hours. Furthermore, the signage at the site states that “You can purchase additional time (if required) at the payment machines or by phone before leaving”. The appellant had the option to purchase additional time once his parking ticket had expired. On this occasion, the appellant has failed to comply with the terms and conditions. As such, I can conclude that the parking charge was issued correctly. Just doesn't seem fair to me?
Latest
Our Picks
Reclaim the right Ltd
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS