Parking eye definition of parking

[i hate bailiffs]

Having recived a parking charge notice at a retail park from parking eye

am at the letter before county court claim how exciting:lol:

 

There first invoice states my arrival and departure time

The signage which is clearly displayed at the entrance and throughout the car park........

 

 

By either not purchasing the appropriate parking time or by remaining at the car park longer than the permit tatted time according to terms and conditions

 

however the car park signage clearly states 45 mins parking for all customers but I was there 1hour o minutes

 

According to there entry and exit times

 

definition of parking the act or practice of temporarily leaving a vehicle or maneavering a vehicle into a certain location

 

So how can they claim I was parked longer than permitted when was in the queue for a parking space and queue leaving the car park

[Sidewinder]

Have you made an appeal based on the assertion that you were not 'parked' for the length of time that you were permitted under their T&Cs?

[i hate bailiffs]

Not as yet there letter states that they WILL issue court proceedings in the next 14 days unless I pay

 

Guess I will have court papers soon

[Sidewinder]

I was thinking more of trying to stop the claim before it comes to them issuing proceedings - as you know, PE are throwing court papers out like confetti at the moment

[i hate bailiffs]

Yes they are throwing them out all the time

But missed the appeal time with being away

 

If they do court papers does not mean that they will win

Despite the claims on there website!

[Sidewinder]

Yes they are throwing them out all the time

But missed the appeal time with being away

 

If they do court papers does not mean that they will win

Despite the claims on there website!

 

Absolutely - and it would be good to see them come unstuck!

[ericsbrother]

You can claim that you fulfilled the contract by not being parked more than the allowed time and they have now changed the contract by changing the terms from parking to staying and that you reject this change to the written terms and therefore they have caused a breach of contract and not you and so they owe you the sum notified on their signage for the breach.

Check wording on sign to ensure that your letter is exactly correct in the terms. If they then decide tostart a claim against you, counterclaim for the same amount.

[i hate bailiffs]

You can claim that you fulfilled the contract by not being parked more than the allowed time and they have now changed the contract by changing the terms from parking to staying and that you reject this change to the written terms and therefore they have caused a breach of contract and not you and so they owe you the sum notified on their signage for the breach.

Check wording on sign to ensure that your letter is exactly correct in the terms. If they then decide tostart a claim against you, counterclaim for the same amount.

 

I drove into and out of the same car park to read the signage and it stated 45 minuets Free parking for all customers

 

Today I did not park but still took over 10 mins to drive in and out the car park as packed and traffic lights on junction outside car park

 

In a way hoping for court paperwork as parking eye website states they are fighting back against the forums but could you ever believe there own site

[ericsbrother]

They are arguing a breach of contract so hit them with their own stick. Fighting back against the consumer and motoring forums? If they were in the right they wouldnt have to fight anything, the courts would have made ndecisions that went against them and cases like VCS v Somerfield wouldnt have happened.

[i hate bailiffs]

Although there is no garantee of a win there paperwork says they Will issue court proceedings if no payment made in 14 days

 

all I can say is if parking eye are reading this

 

Send me court paperwork the forums are fighting back:boxing::boxing:

[dpick]

Hi not sure on this but I believe that claiming that they will issue court proceedings and then not doing so is against OFT guidelines so you may have a case to report to OFT if they do not issue.

 

dpick

[Nev Met]

If you were the driver but not the registered keeper of the vehicle then if you get the registered keeper to provide Parking Eye with the full serviceable name and address of the driver before they issue court proceedings then you will be entitled (as the driver) to go through the appeals process (ParkingEye's and then POPLA)

 

Obviously if you are both RK and driver then this doesn't apply.

[citizenB]

Hi not sure on this but I believe that claiming that they will issue court proceedings and then not doing so is against OFT guidelines so you may have a case to report to OFT if they do not issue.

 

dpick

 

You are correct - if they are using the "threat" of a claim as a debt collection (parking ticket) tool then the OFT will investigate. They should not threaten to take steps that they are not permitted to take or that they will not follow through.

 

They censured Mucky Hall and 1st credit for threatening to / issuing, stat demands with no intention of taking them further if the recipient didn't respond.

[Nev Met]

Having recived a parking charge notice at a retail park from parking eye

am at the letter before county court claim how exciting:lol:

 

There first invoice states my arrival and departure time

The signage which is clearly displayed at the entrance and throughout the car park........

 

 

By either not purchasing the appropriate parking time or by remaining at the car park longer than the permit tatted time according to terms and conditions

 

however the car park signage clearly states 45 mins parking for all customers but I was there 1hour o minutes

 

According to there entry and exit times

 

definition of parking the act or practice of temporarily leaving a vehicle or maneavering a vehicle into a certain location

 

So how can they claim I was parked longer than permitted when was in the queue for a parking space and queue leaving the car park

 

Parking Eye generally uses ANPR camera’s at the entrance/exit of it's car parks.

 

The cameras only record the time that a vehicle enters the car park and when it leaves, they do not record the actual parking event or the point at which the contract to park is entered into.

 

There are a number of separate actions involved here that relate to the parking event.

 

1 Driving into the car park. (Entry time recorded on ANPR).

 

2 Locating and then Parking the car in an empty parking space.

 

3 Reading the terms and conditions of parking offered at the retail park.

 

4 Acceptance of those terms and conditions by remaining at the car park ('Parking' under contract starts now)

 

5 Driving out of the parking space ('Parking' under contract ends now)

 

6 Driving out of the retail park. (Exit time recorded on ANPR).

 

The times of the actual ‘parking under contract’ event therefore differ significantly from the entry and exit times recorded by Parking Eye’s ANPR cameras. Furthermore, Parking Eye’s ANPR system takes no account of the regular problems in effecting a speedy departure due to peak shopping times,the car park road layouts and any problems exiting onto the highway

Edited October 13, 2013 by Nev Met

[i hate bailiffs]

But the signage clearly states 45 mins Free parking for customers pay and enter rege number after that

 

Parking =the act or practice of temporally leaving a vehicle or maneavering a vehicle into a certain location

 

The signage does not state anything about max time ect

 

There threading letters state

 

By either not purchasing the appropriate parking time or by remaining at the car park longer than permitted in accordance with the terms and conditions set out in the signage

 

Parking eye are changing the rules from signage to there letters

 

I was not parked for the times they state

There case is week should they carry out with there threat of court

[ericsbrother]

PE seem to do this quite often, referring to signs that dont exist, change the wording in their invoices from those that appear on thier signs, insist that you show proof of a minimum spend when previously they asked for a copy of shopping receipt. I can see that this will do them no good at all if that is how they go on at court but the bigget problem is that we are not hitting the shops with this infomation and telling them that it will cost them lost business by allowing their agents to lie their way into your wallet. Pretty easy to get on to a single retailer like a supermarket but a damned sight harder with these multi-developments as many of the shops hate the trouble they are caused by these parking companies but Parking Eye in particular.

When peole win at court they ought to write to the company that emplyed them and tell them that the court action was supposedly in their interest and that they areas culpable in the deceit as the parking. co.

[Tony P]

The BPA's Code of Conduct probably covers the OP's original point.

 

13.2 You should allow the driver a reasonable ‘grace period’ in which to decide if they are going to stay or go. If the driver is on your land without permission you should still allow them a grace period to read your signs and leave before you take enforcement action.

 

and

 

13.4 You should allow the driver a reasonable period to leave the private car park after the parking contract has ended, before you take enforcement action.

 

That shows a differentiation between time parked (the contract period) and time on the land (between entry and exit). But PE's ANPR does not bother with such a differentiation.

 

http://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/AOS/609_AOS_CoP_June_2013_update.pdf

Plenty of ammunition here!

[i hate bailiffs]

You are correct - if they are using the "threat" of a claim as a debt collection (parking ticket) tool then the OFT will investigate. They should not threaten to take steps that they are not permitted to take or that they will not follow through.

 

They censured Mucky Hall and 1st credit for threatening to / issuing, stat demands with no intention of taking them further if the recipient didn't respond.

 

Still no claim form

Payment required in 14 days otherwise they WILL issue court proceedings

 

That was 37 days ago think time to make a complaint

Was looking forwards to court to give them another bashing

[themagician]

Still no claim form

Payment required in 14 days otherwise they WILL issue court proceedings

 

That was 37 days ago think time to make a complaint

Was looking forwards to court to give them another bashing

PE have been telling me this now for over a year,so you may aswell sit down,put feet up have a very long cup of tea and be board out yah brain waiting.