Jump to content

koko_loco

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    19
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About koko_loco

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Parking Eye replied a few days after receiving my letter. They said they will look into the matter. I've not heard anything from them since. In the new year, when I have some time I will write to them intructing them to delete all the data they hold regarding me in accordance with GDPR.
  2. Thanks DragonFly and ericsbrother The letter has now been posted.
  3. I have revised some of the wording in the letter. Feedback would be appreciated. Is it okay to send now? To Whom It May Concern at parkingeye Ltd I have received several speculative invoices (parking charge ) from yourselves regarding a parking incident which occurred in the car park of Cedar Court Hotel. I have received a letter Before county court Claim from you, dated 8th June 2018 relating to this matter. The signage in the car park states that it is a "Patron Only Car Park". The main condition of parking states that "hotel patrons must enter their full, correct vehicle registration details...in reception". The signage is prohibitive to anyone who is not a hotel patron. The driver was not a hotel patron. So, the signage is a deterrent rather than a genuine offer of terms and therefore there is/was no contract between the driver and ParkingEye Ltd. The payment you are demanding is an unlawful penalty and not a proper consideration.
  4. Maybe I should also say "Do not contact me again regarding this matter unless it is to request to see the evidence of the trespass, the cost of which is £100 payable in advance."
  5. Am I okay to send this letter: To Whom It May Concern at ParkingEye Ltd I have received several speculative invoices (parking charge) from yourselves regarding a trespass issue which occurred in the car park of Cedar Court Hotel. Today I received a Letter Before County Court Claim, dated 8th June 2018 relating to this matter. The signage in the car park states that it is a "Patron Only Car Park". The main condition of parking states that "hotel patrons must enter their full, correct vehicle registration details...in reception". The driver of the vehicle did not use the hotel at all therefore was not a patron and therefore, there was no contract between the driver and ParkingEye. Since the driver was not a hotel patron, and since the parking conditions only apply to hotel patrons, there is/was no contract. The driver was a trespasser. The trespass issue is a matter between the driver and the landowner. It, therefore, has absolutely nothing to do with ParkingEye. There is absolutely no need for the driver (or for that matter keeper) to make any arrangements whatsoever to pay ParkingEye anything no matter how many letters wanting payment are sent out. Do not contact me again regarding this matter again. In accordance with the new GDPR regulations, you must now remove ALL data you hold regarding me, as it has been made clear to you that the trespass issue has absolutely nothing to do with you, ParkingEye at all.
  6. Hi ericsbrother and dx100uk I have received a Letter Before County Court Claim from Parking Eye today. This is what it says: LETTER BEFFORE COUNTY COURT CLAIM On the 24May 2018 we notified you, as the registered keeper of this vehickle, that you had become liable for the above parking charge notice, which concerned a breach of the parking terms and conditions at Cedar Court Hotel on 16 April 2018. This parking charge notice was levied for breach of contract and the requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 012 (POFA) have been satisfied. We now require full payment of the outstanding parking charge in the sum of £100.00. Payment details can be found at the top of this letter. If you wish to contact ParkingEye then you must do so within 30 days of the top of this Letter Before Claim using the enclosed Reply Form. Please refer to the enclosed Information Sheet for more details. If further action is required to recover the outstanding amount and court proceedings are issued, further costs will be incurred. These costs will include, but are not limited to, £50 solicitior's costs and £25 court claim issue fee. Please note that no interest has accrued on the outstanding balance detailed above and that no additional recovery charges have been added at this stage. We would further draw your attention to the Supreme Court decision detailed at paragraph 7 overleaf. The appeal concerned the value of ParkingEye's Parking Charges and the judgment, granted in ParkingEye'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. So, do I now need to tell them that the driver was a trespasser? What other info should I include? They have attached forms where they want me to list my income and expenditure and send it to them...cheeky beggars!! The back of ParkingEye's letter includes details of the Beavis case. They also include this paragraph: As court proceedings have not yet begun and as no defence has yet been filed, it is impossible for ParkingEye to state exactly the document that will be relied upon. However, the essential documents will be; all Parking Charge notices that have been sent, any defence submitted by you, any reply to defence submitted by us, any document proving ParkingEye's authorisation to operate on site, and any signage plan or images of signage from the site in question. Thank you for any help and advice you might be able to give.
  7. Thanks dx100uk and ericsbrother. I was unsure as to when it would be the right time to make contact with them, but you have clarified this for me.
  8. Should I not write to Parking Eye at all to inform them of the situation? Is the general advice to wait for them to take me to court? Honestly, I would prefer not to go to court. I would prefer to let them know that this is a trespass issue and then for them to leave me alone. After letting them know, that this issue has nothing to do with them or the keeper, but rather it is between the landowner and the driver, then I would instruct them to remove my data from their records, in accordance with GDPR. After that, my intention would be to send them a SAR. If they still hold details relating to me, then I can take further action. Or, if they claim they no longer hold any details about me, but 5 years down the road take me to small claims, then I have a GDPR breach as ammo as well. I want them to delete all the records they hold about me. This is the reason I want to inform them that it is a trespass issue.
  9. Hi BazzaS, you know what it's like...you put something in an ultra safe place and then cant find it!!! I managed to do this with a bank book. I was having some work done on my house and hid the bank book in an empty box of tights in the back of a cupboard. I turned the house upside down looking for the bank book, couldn't find it. Cancelled it, and got a new one. Found the original purely by accident a couple of years later when I was decluttering!
  10. Thanks dx100uk. Sorry for my ignorance but what does CSL stand for? Also, I figured because of GDPR, ParkingEye should not be holding any details about me since this is a matter between landowner and driver (not Parking Eye and the keeper). I just want all my data removed from their records so that I dont ever have to think about this or be bothered by them about this ever again. If they do keep my data (against my instructions) when it is not necessary then they are breaking GDPR regulations and I can take action against them. But, to do this, I have to first inform them of the situation (trespass) and provide them with instructions relating to my data (ie delete it). If I dont do this, then they might bring action against me in 5 years time when I might have lost the evidence that I have that shows that this is a trespass matter.
  11. Hi All I have received another letter from Parking Eye. This is what it says: Dear Sir/Madam We are writing to inform you that the requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act in respect of keeper liability have now been satisfied and as 29 days have passed from the date notice of the Parking Charge was given, ParkingEye now has the right to recover any unpaid part of the Parking Charge from you, the registered keeper. The amount payable is £100.00. This payment is required within 14 days to avoid further action. If this letter is ignored, further action may include referring to a Credit Reference Agency to confirm the correct address, instruction of solicitiors to secure immediate payment, referral to debt recovery or the issuance of court proceedings, all of which could incur further costs which may be added to the amount owed. To avoid further unnnecesarry costs or action, please pay the outstanding charge amount as stated above or make arrangements for the driver to pay, in accordance with the parking terms and conditions. Further information, including how to pay or appeal can be found on the reverse of this notice. Please be aware that on 4th November 2015, the Supreme Court dismissed the further appeal lodged in relation to the matter of ParkingEye v Beavis 2015 UKSC 67. The appeal concerned the value of Parkingeye's Parking Charges and the Judgement, granted in ParkingEye's favour, delivers a binding precedent in respect of the value of the Parking Charge. The Judgment can be found by visiting....blah, blah, blah The first thing that jumped out at me was they may contact a credit reference agency. I thought that a company/organisation had to have explicit permission from an individual before they could do that. With the new GDPR rules, would the credit reference agency be allowed to release details about me without my permission? Also, since this is a trespass issue between the driver and the landowner (and because no contract was formed between the driver and ParkingEye), I was thinking of sending this letter: "To Whom It May Concern at ParkingEye Ltd This is NOT a letter of appeal. I have received several speculative invoices (parking charge) from yourselves regarding a trespass issue which occurred in the car park of Cedar Court Hotel. The signage in the car park states that it is a "Patron Only Car Park". The main condition of parking states that "hotel patrons must enter their full, correct vehicle registration details...in reception". The driver of the vehicle did not use the hotel at all therefore, there was no contract between the driver and ParkingEye. Since the driver was not a hotel patron, and since the parking conditions only apply to hotel patrons, there is/was no contract. The driver was a trespasser. The trespass issue is a matter between the driver and the landowner. It, therefore, has absolutely nothing to do with ParkingEye. There is absolutely no need for the driver to make any arrangements whatsoever to pay ParkingEye anything no matter how many speculative invoices are sent out. Do not contact me again regarding this matter again. In accordance with the new GDPR regulations, you must now remove ALL data you hold regarding me, as it has been made clear to you that the trespass issue has absolutely nothing to do with you (ParkingEye) at all. I require confirmation in writing that this has been done. You have 28 days from the date of this letter." Please let me know your thoughts.
  12. Hi EricsBrother, thank you so much for this explanation. It has set my mind at ease.
  13. Thanks LoookinForInfo and EricsBrother So, in my appeal to Parking Eye, should I just say... "I am appealing because there was insufficient signage?" and then appeal to POPLA (stating insufficent signage, not a contract and trespass) once I'm provided with a code?
  14. Hi All Just bumping this thread because I have to decide whether I'm going to appeal this one or pay parking eye. If I pay, then Friday is the last day I can get the money to them before the £60 goes back up to £100. Initially, I was confident it was a trespass issue but now... I'm not so sure. Presumably I would have to prove that the driver did not use hotel. I have emails and texts sent to and from the driver which detail how the car ended up in the car park. The driver was supposed to get a hire car to go to Liverpool through the company that they work for. The hire car didnt get organised in time so the driver had to make alternative arrangements with a colleague who was also travelling to Liverpool but was coming from Newcastle. He met the driver at Cedar Court because it's quite close to the motorway, so it is convenient. Post 7 in this thread contains the parking signs at the car park if that is of any use and also describes how the driver ended up parking in the hotel car park (due to not seeing the signs). Any help is appreciated.
  15. Hi ericsbrother, I have attached the signage in a two page pdf in post 7. Please can you have a look at it. Hi lookinforinfo, I dont intend to ignore them. I do intend to appeal. I just need to know the best course of action to take so need a little advice.
×
×
  • Create New...