Jump to content
stjuninho

Parking Eye - photographic evidence of the driver

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3624 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi, this forum was amazingly helpful a few years back for me but wanted some updated advice.

 

Parking Eye believe we outstayed our welcome at a commercial car park, and hae written saying they have photographic evidence of the times and who the driver is.

 

I wonder how clear the CCTV footage could be, but regardless, if they are able to demonstrate who the driver is, that destroys the "I am the owner, but wasn't the driver" argument that I used on a previous ticket?

 

Any advice?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just ignore. For a start Parking Eye don't do court and, in the remote possibility that it does go to court, I doubt if the image would be clear enough to prove who the actual driver was. This is an example of the scare tactics employed by parking companies. They must be getting desperate!

 

Don't forget they can only claim for the actual loss suffered by the landowner, anything else would be deemed an unfair penalty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you name this man? http://businessromance.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/man-in-suit-cheap-street-bath.jpg

 

CCTV imagery doesn't help them. It's just a trick to make you think they have 'evidence' and that that 'evidence' entitles them to the money they are after. It doesn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very good point. I suppose they have no idea who the picture is of .

 

I presume DVLA only give names and addresses to these companies. Not photos on driving licenses?

 

Thank you

 

St Juninho.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DVLA only supply the registered keeprs name and address, exactly as it appears on the front of the V5c (registartion document).

 

Completely ignore these clowns. The fact they obtain your details is to frighten people. DVLA do not support them in any way at all. DVLA just acept their £2.50 for your information.

 

DO NOT make the mistake or writing back, telephoning or in any other way responding to them. You will now get a series of fright-o-grams, from reminders, to final warnings, to final, final chances, to final ever last chance ever final oportuinites. These will be in varius disguises, like Debt collectors (woah, so scary) or even solicitors (woah, really frightening).

 

Bottom line is you owe them sweet fanny adams. Be as worried about their con as you are of owning me that fiver still. What fiver? Exactly!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't be concerned about the quality of any supposed evidence. Calling it evidence is giving it it's most generous meaning. Nice point AL.

regards


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you very much indeed. I am very grateful to the contributors to this site for the help.

 

I know it's against advice, but I may write along the lines of the standard letter #1 (on the stickys). It worked last time. I know they may end up writing more letters if they feel they have "a bite", but seems the best course of action to me.

 

Thanks again.

 

St Juninho.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some people just cannot be helped. I feel you are one of them. Just write to them, then pay them. I don't know why I bother sometimes!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

:lol::lol::lol:

 

 

 

 

 

Some people just cannot be helped. I feel you are one of them. Just write to them, then pay them. I don't know why I bother sometimes!

 

 

 

 

 

Come on wheelergeezer you know the saying " you can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it drink"

I think that phrase could also include Ass'es

 

 

:)

 

 

dk


:welcome::rofl::welcome:

 

 

 

 

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

 

 

:tea:

 

 

 

most of my knowledge is from the school of hard knocks

 

not based on any legal background

 

As quite a lot fellow caggers state seek Legal Advice

 

 

:ranger:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry if you feel I'm beyond help.

 

I thought you said that all they can do is write letters to me.

 

Doesn't that cost them money? Does that do me any harm at all? Don't others on this site advise writing a first letter (see Sticky's). Don't these companies write more letters whether you reply or not.

 

Obviously I'm too thick to know the answers to these. I'll crawl back to my cave.

 

StJ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, they can only write letters. Ignore them and do not contact them at all.

 

I'm sure the guys above didn't meant to sound a bit rude :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I meant to sound rude. Someone asks for advise, gets very sound advise and then announces that they will ignore that and do the exact opposite. Deserved the reply I posted - and trust me, that was very polite compared to what I wanted to say!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, some people come on here, and even after reading all the good advice about private parking, still think that their particular situation is somehow unique and different to all the other cases documented on here. That's when the frustration kicks in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the "I am the owner, but wasn't the driver" argument

 

be careful in stating you were not the driver when in fact you were, it is best to either ignore or if you must reply say "i confirm I am the registered keeper, however for this matter i suggest you take this up with the driver." here you are not denying that you are the driver, but stating that the invoice shoudl be addressed to the driver, which they cannot assertain from CCTV

 

If it ever did go to court and you have stated you were not the driver and you clearly were your defense would fall apart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Benn and Al, and to everyone else.

 

StJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, I meant to sound rude ...... and trust me that was very polite compared to what I wanted to say!

 

Aww, Wheeler. I am following almost all of your advice. I'm not going to pay, and thanks to your information I won't be intimidated by their threats of photographic evidence of the driver. Thank you, really.

 

But I also know of other expert advice on this forum (see stickys from Bernie_the_Bolt) who suggests a simple single template letter to send. It seemed like a good idea to me and it worked very well for me last time, as I said. Others say it doesn't matter either way, they don't read them. But where's the harm.

 

That's the only bit of your advice I wasn't going to follow. I think you are being over-sensitive.

 

StJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But I also know of other expert advice on this forum (see stickys from Bernie_the_Bolt) who suggests a simple single template letter to send

 

Those template letters were written some time ago when it was thought there was a (slim) chance you could make headroad with the PPCs and/or if it went to court the fact that you hadn't communicated with them may go against you.

 

Times have moved on since then, and now I think you will find the majority of CAG members, including Bernie the Bolt, recommend totally ignoring the PPC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers Crem.

 

I had wondered that, but Bernie has since then actually written an update on his sticky saying he has some reservations about the new advice of ignoring all letters. He concludes in his update that it is down to individuals to decide whether "you are prepared to run the risk". Albeit a small risk.

 

I've no idea whether that is sensible or not, or maybe even the update is now out of date (!!!) but I guess that's why he hasn't taken the letters down?

 

Thanks again. StJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, I meant to sound rude. Someone asks for advise, gets very sound advise and then announces that they will ignore that and do the exact opposite. Deserved the reply I posted - and trust me, that was very polite compared to what I wanted to say!

 

 

yep my fingers are itching too...............

 

dx

 

 

who's going to blink first WG:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

if everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's tomorrow

the biggest financial industry in the UK, DCA;s would collapse overnight.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, I meant to sound rude. Someone asks for advise, gets very sound advise and then announces that they will ignore that and do the exact opposite. Deserved the reply I posted - and trust me, that was very polite compared to what I wanted to say!

 

Then you are lucky not to have gotten what you deserve - an equally rude response!

 

You cannot possibly know all of the OP's circumstances and there are many where writing may be appropriate.

 

The purpose of this forum is that people make an informed choice. This OP seems actually to have decided on the appropriate course of action for themselves having become informed and that is a good thing.


********************************************

Nothing in this post constitutes "advice" which I may not, in any event, be qualified to provide.

The only interpretation permitted on this post (or any others I may have made) is that this is what I would personally consider doing in the circumstances discussed. Each and every reader of this post or any other I may have made must take responsibility for forming their own view and making their own decision.

I receive an unwieldy number of private messages. I am happy to respond to messages posted on open forum but am unable to respond to private messages, seeking advice, when the substance of that message should properly be on the open forum.

Many thanks for your assistance and understanding on this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Those template letters were written some time ago when it was thought there was a (slim) chance you could make headroad with the PPCs and/or if it went to court the fact that you hadn't communicated with them may go against you.

 

Times have moved on since then, and now I think you will find the majority of CAG members, including Bernie the Bolt, recommend totally ignoring the PPC

 

Actually, I don't think I've ever recommended any course of action for a PPC!

 

In my own life I have used the templates (before and after they became templates) and I have ignored. I have noticed no difference in the behaviour of the PPCs as a result and my experience has never been of being a "hooked fish". PPCs may of course have a different approach now as I haven't had a PPC "invoice" for a while.

 

I remain of the view that there are judges who may well take a view that motorists may have a case to answer and who may take a dim view of motorists who ignore all letters. If that is a worry to someone then the letters, in my view, could well still be appropriate.


********************************************

Nothing in this post constitutes "advice" which I may not, in any event, be qualified to provide.

The only interpretation permitted on this post (or any others I may have made) is that this is what I would personally consider doing in the circumstances discussed. Each and every reader of this post or any other I may have made must take responsibility for forming their own view and making their own decision.

I receive an unwieldy number of private messages. I am happy to respond to messages posted on open forum but am unable to respond to private messages, seeking advice, when the substance of that message should properly be on the open forum.

Many thanks for your assistance and understanding on this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with contacting a PPC is that once you do they will, as we well know, become even more persistent. I recommend NOT responding other than a curt & very brief "get lost" letter followed by returning any & all further mail to them postage unpaid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I remain of the view that there are judges who may well take a view that motorists may have a case to answer and who may take a dim view of motorists who ignore all letters. If that is a worry to someone then the letters, in my view, could well still be appropriate.

 

In the Trethowans case the judge asked why the defendant hadn't responded to letters. He seemed satisfied with the answer that it was well established advice on internet forums.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Bernie, et al. The main reason I want to send a (single, "icily polite") letter is that it will make me feel a little more comfortable about all this. If the price I pay is that I get a few more letters as a consequence, well, I can cope now that I know that I don't need to be intimidated.

 

They can waste their stamps to their heart's content.

 

Thanks again, StJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you need to send letters to make you feel comfortable, you are not getting your head around the [problem].

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...