PE Drop Court Case: Paperwork "Irregularities"

[Michael Browne]

PE Drop Court Case: Paperwork "Irregularities"

ParkingEye had issued a court claim against a Ms Byrne (claim no. 3JD04522), and one of the helpers from Pepipoo assisted the OP with her defence.

 

PE were requested to provide evidence of landowner’s authority to levy parking charges and pursue non-payers to court, and they produced a Witness Statement signed by the managing agents, Colliers International.

 

We had seen various other copies of this same witness statement relating to other cases, and it seemed odd that the signature on each one was absolutely identical – if you laid one piece of paper on top of another, the signatures matched perfectly. However, the dates all seemed to be in different handwriting.

 

This led to the conclusion that Colliers had simply signed a blank form, and that PE had photocopied a stack of these, filling in the details to suit each case.

 

The OP contacted Colliers directly and confronted them with the evidence, and their representative said that they would have to speak to PE’s legal department as these were “serious allegations”.

 

A few days later, the OP received notification that the claim was now discontinued. Unsurprisingly perhaps, as one imagines that neither PE nor Colliers would want this apparently dubious practice publicly aired in a Court of Law.

 

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=4812058

 

 

Parking Eye caught out using post-dated witness statements

 

The Prankster has been made aware that ParkingEye's system for submitting landowner witness statements as evidence in court cases and POPLA cases is not robust. There appears to be failures in quality control by ParkingEye in the management of these witness statements.

 

In a recent case it was found that the witness statements were pre-signed by one person, and the dates added at a later time by a different person.

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/

[BankFodder]

I can't imagine that Parking Eye would do this kind of thing. After all, a few years ago the Court of Appeal said that Parking Eye had acted dishonestly - although without intending to do so. Surely this couldn't happen again.

 

I am sure that there must be an entirely innocent explanation.

I wonder what it is.

[kirkbyinfurnesslad]

Bank fodder yes they are whiter then white.......

 

Surely no attempt at a criminal act......

[BankFodder]

In fact, I wonder how many times this template signature has been used on other court documents. I wonder if Parking Eye has informed the relevant courts of this accident. I suppose that they must have informed the BPA - their professional association. I'm sure that they must have because I am sure that they have a duty to inform the BPA about any potential breaches of their code of practice. I wonder if they have informed the Ministry of Justice - because I expect that their is a duty to inform them of any potential irregularities of the court process. I would say that they probably have a duty to do so, so yes, of course I am sure that they have informed everyone.

But just in case they have forgotten, maybe someone should do it for them.

 

And Trading Standards.

And the DVLA

 

And any supermarkets or other commercial clients.