Popla appeal win against Parking Eye

[ian2547]

Just to let anyone who wants to know that I have just received via email the result of my POPLA appeal against a parking fine issued at Charnock Richard Services on the M6. I won!!! they upheld my appeal. Don't know how else I can help people, still have copy of my defence statement and have copy of there decision but not sure how to upload for all to see and use if they want. Think I may have sussed the attachment feature will try to upload the docs.

Edited July 18, 2013 by ian2547

[ims21]

Hi

 

I have unapproved the attachment as there are personal details etc. showing. Please remove all reference numbers and personal info and then post them up.

[ian2547]

Have taken all personal details off now

[ian2547]

Are they okay now

[ims21]

Yep they appear to be ok apart from one minor point on the PDF....right at the bottom there appears to be a reference number. Might be best just to whip that out to be on the safe side for your own privacy

[ian2547]

All done thanks for your help

[ims21]

Great stuff and well done on putting Parking Eye in their place.

 

I'll move this thread to the Private Parking forum. You won't need to do anything...it is purely an administrative task.

[ims21]

Thread moved to the appropriate forum

[DBC]

We are now seeing this time after time with Parking Eye. They cannot justify that £100 as being a "genuine pre-estimate of loss". When will they learn?

[ScarletPimpernel]

We are now seeing this time after time with Parking Eye. They cannot justify that £100 as being a "genuine pre-estimate of loss". When will they learn?

 

What, and them having an in-house solicitor and everything....

 

I imagine that PE know perfectly well that their charges aren't enforceable, but then all speculative invoicing schemes, whether civil recovery or parking, are based on a proportion of targets paying up without appealing to POPLA or defending themselves in court.

[Peterbard]

Well done for standing up for your rights.

 

The issue with Parking Eye is that they appear to be working on the principle that if you throw enough mud, some will stick. Issue enough court summons and some will be successful as they will simply get default judgments like the ones they advertise on their own website as successes.

[Scouse Magic]

Well Done ! all victories are good victories..... I love it when the public work it right up these crooked companies..... we salute you

[DBC]

Somebody over on MSE has been analyzing the POPLA appeals notified on that forum. It seems that the best winning strategy is to go for genuine pre-estimate of loss, or lack of contract or poor signage . Just relying on fallen permits or mitigating circumstances seems to be a loser for the motorist.

[Crocdoc]

I live in Scotland therfore POPLA is not an Issue up here, however the one thing that is becoming standard throughout is that these companies try and justify geniune pre-estimate of loss based on the upper limit provided by the BPA in their so called code of practice, this to my mind raises the question of how the £100 charge was calculated, to the best of my knowledge this information has never been provided by the BPA.

 

I have however listened to the BPA on radio when the question was asked as to how the the loss could reduce in real terms the longer the overstay, TO WHICH THE BPA RESPONDED , WE DON'T KNOW.

 

A FUTURE QUESTION FOR POPLA, PERHAPS.

[DBC]

I think that £100 was chosen by the BPA to mimic that claimed by councils to give it some air of respectability. What the BPA have failed to notice is that the council's £100 is based on proper legislative "traffic orders", and is nothing to do with civil law pertaining to contract or trespass which apply to private parking tickets.

[Peterbard]

Somebody over on MSE has been analyzing the POPLA appeals notified on that forum. It seems that the best winning strategy is to go for genuine pre-estimate of loss, or lack of contract or poor signage . Just relying on fallen permits or mitigating circumstances seems to be a loser for the motorist.

 

That's great! The only bit I'd question about that, unless used in conjunction with other issues, is the contract, as there is a well known judgment, albeit only from the County Court, so it does not set precedent, where the judge went through each element of the contract process and adjudged that a contract existed. As I say, this does not set legal precedent as it was only the County Court, but it would be unwise to rely purely on that argument.

[DBC]

Yet another POPLA appeal lost by PE, and for the same reason, they could not produce evidence of a true pre-estimate of loss. (from PePiPoo):-

 

An alleged overstay of 10 minutes at the Rheidol Retail Park Aberystwyth. The registered keeper is a friend of mine.

Date of alleged contravention 21st March 2013

Date of Ntk 27th March 2013

Challenge to PE 2nd April 2013 (just for the hell of it we flew solo with a 'Failure to Identify the Creditor' and nothing else.

'EYE01' appeal rejected letter 9th April 2013 (they are getting these out very quickly, perhaps they should simply send them with the initial NtK and save of postage?)

 

'Bog Standard' POPLA appeal submitted on 17th April 2013

 

Then between then and the POPLA decision we received lots and lots of shiny paper from PE with nothing of evidential value whatsoever before we received a letter dated 17th July 2013 confirming that Parking Eye's game of bluster and bluff had come to it's inevitable conclusion.

 

 

[citizenB]

Well done Ian2547. I will be chuckling over the content of your email to POPLA for some while. It is brilliant, especially the penultimate paragraph.

[Bill_Pine]

I know this is an old one but I'd just like to say thanks to Ian for the uploaded template. Hopefully with some adjustments I can fashion an appeal to suit my predicament.

 

First unfair parking ticket in 20 years of bloody driving!

[DBC]

PE seem to be losing every POPLA appeal when they cannot justify their so-called "losses". This from last week:-

I received a ticket for an overstay in a free car park (Max 4hrs) and appealed this to POPLA with the help and guidance of this forum.

I must admit it was a bit daunting at first and I was inclined to just pay the money grabbing parking company to make it go away. However, having researched this and with the knowledge and support of the good people of pepipoo I decided to appeal.

POPLA has now processed the appeal and I am pleased to say that it was upheld. The assessor agreed that the operator's charge was not a genuine pre-estimate of loss but was a list of running costs that they would have had to pay regardless of my overstay. I am very pleased to turn a potential profit for PE into a loss of the POPLA fee and admin costs. I would encourage anyone browsing this site and debating whether to pay up or appeal to do the latter and appeal.

[armadillo71]

PE seem to be losing every POPLA appeal when they cannot justify their so-called "losses". This from last week:-

I received a ticket for an overstay in a free car park (Max 4hrs) and appealed this to POPLA with the help and guidance of this forum.

I must admit it was a bit daunting at first and I was inclined to just pay the money grabbing parking company to make it go away. However, having researched this and with the knowledge and support of the good people of pepipoo I decided to appeal.

POPLA has now processed the appeal and I am pleased to say that it was upheld. The assessor agreed that the operator's charge was not a genuine pre-estimate of loss but was a list of running costs that they would have had to pay regardless of my overstay. I am very pleased to turn a potential profit for PE into a loss of the POPLA fee and admin costs. I would encourage anyone browsing this site and debating whether to pay up or appeal to do the latter and appeal.

 

I am currently awaiting response from pe where in my initial appeal, I have told them my popla appeal would be genuine pre estimate of loss...

Will they save themselves some money?

[DBC]

I am currently awaiting response from pe where in my initial appeal, I have told them my popla appeal would be genuine pre estimate of loss...

Will they save themselves some money?

 

It depends if they actually read your appeal , or just send out an automatic and templated letter. Anyway, PE's definition of a loss includes such things as "erection and maintenance of signs and cameras", staff wages and even membership fees to the BPA. As you see they seem to be living on a different planet to us mere mortals.

[Bill_Pine]

Would anyone recommend I tell PE the truth about my unintentional 28 minutes overstay?

 

I made the mistake of leaving my side lights on when leaving the car and went about mooching around the shops that are on the car park site. An hour later I returned to a battery with not enough juice to start the car and spend the remaining hour and a bit getting the bus back to grab another battery from home...

Edited October 7, 2013 by Bill_Pine

[DBC]

PE don't do "mitigating circumstances". Just wait for POPLA and then hit them with the usual "pre-estimate of loss" or "contract to take people to court" argument. That wins every time.

[Bill_Pine]

PE don't do "mitigating circumstances". Just wait for POPLA and then hit them with the usual "pre-estimate of loss" or "contract to take people to court" argument. That wins every time.

 

 

Ah, I see. Bit naughty when it's a genuine and unfortunate mistake.

 

Thanks for the heads up!