Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


CookieRocks

Parking Eye (again!) **Won at POPLA**

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2135 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

Had a similar issue sometime last year, which was ultimately cancelled.

 

Without going into too much detail:

 

Got a Parking Charge Notice end of 2013, again in my friends dads name (car is registered to the dad, who is out of the country).

 

Didn't want the hassle of it all being in his name, so sent a letter naming the son as driver.

 

Eventually Parking Eye sent the Parking Charge Notice in sons name.

 

Sent a short appeal denying that anything is owed and asked for a POPLA code.

 

Yesterday, received a letter with the POPLA code, but its been sent in the dads name.

 

Considering the son was named as driver, can it be ignored until the 35 days are up and therefore canceled for being out of time? Or should we inform them it has been sent in the wrong name again, get them to correct it and then send a full appeal to POPLA?

 

I'm not sure which way to go at the moment.

 

Thanks


CookieRocks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Had a similar issue sometime last year, which was ultimately cancelled.

 

Without going into too much detail:

 

Got a Parking Charge Notice end of 2013, again in my friends dads name (car is registered to the dad, who is out of the country).

 

Didn't want the hassle of it all being in his name, so sent a letter naming the son as driver.

 

Eventually Parking Eye sent the Parking Charge Notice in sons name.

 

Sent a short appeal denying that anything is owed and asked for a POPLA code.

 

Yesterday, received a letter with the POPLA code, but its been sent in the dads name.

 

Considering the son was named as driver, can it be ignored until the 35 days are up and therefore canceled for being out of time? Or should we inform them it has been sent in the wrong name again, get them to correct it and then send a full appeal to POPLA?

 

I'm not sure which way to go at the moment.

 

Thanks

 

 

If you ignore it you will/could end up in the same situation as last time!

You probably should write back to PE and tell them the situation...

 

 

Personally, as it is the same parking charge number ( just different name),then I would go through with the POPLA appeal stating that the reg keeper is not liable. You include that you would like to see,through sight of contract,that PE have the authorisation to pursue parking charge notices.

You also ask for a breakdown of the genuine pre estimate of loss that this charge must represent.

 

Now it is debatable if you include that the charge is in the wrong name. You don't have to sign anything when appealing to POPLA.

Others may suggest another option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your reply armadillo71.

 

I would like further opinions on this too, if anyone else can help.

 

Surely, by providing the driver details, the registered keeper has no liability to the parking charge notice. He has completed his 'duty' by providing the details, so any further contact with that parking charge reference has nothing to do with him and he can ignore it, in it's entirety.

 

Taking into account, PE have sent letters, which say that driver details at the time of the incident have been provided, it goes to show that they now know who they should be going after. By rejecting the appeal and then again sending it to the registered keeper (who has no liability anymore), with the popla code, that's PE's tough luck? I suppose its just a small detail, but technically the son has not received the rejection letter/ popla code, so technically can't appeal to popla. Personally I think this is PE's own fault and therefore by not sending the rejection letter/ popla code addressed to the son after 35 days, would their own mistake/ admin error/ carelessness cause that particular referenced parking charge to be in default in accordance with the time limits?

 

I'm just thinking outside the box here.

 

Would appreciate everyone's thoughts/ opinions if I am barking up the wrong tree.

 

Regards


CookieRocks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for your reply armadillo71.

 

I would like further opinions on this too, if anyone else can help.

 

Surely, by providing the driver details, the registered keeper has no liability to the parking charge notice. He has completed his 'duty' by providing the details, so any further contact with that parking charge reference has nothing to do with him and he can ignore it, in it's entirety.

 

Taking into account, PE have sent letters, which say that driver details at the time of the incident have been provided, it goes to show that they now know who they should be going after. By rejecting the appeal and then again sending it to the registered keeper (who has no liability anymore), with the popla code, that's PE's tough luck? I suppose its just a small detail, but technically the son has not received the rejection letter/ popla code, so technically can't appeal to popla. Personally I think this is PE's own fault and therefore by not sending the rejection letter/ popla code addressed to the son after 35 days, would their own mistake/ admin error/ carelessness cause that particular referenced parking charge to be in default in accordance with the time limits?

 

I'm just thinking outside the box here.

 

Would appreciate everyone's thoughts/ opinions if I am barking up the wrong tree.

 

Regards

 

All probably true, but how many letters, how much time etc will be spent is anybodies guess...

To end up where you are now, with a POPLA code!

 

A three sentence appeal to POPLA now will see the charge cancelled in two months (?), with the one letter. ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Appeal to POPLA explain that the driver was named, received their own PCN and that PE sent the rejection letter to the keeper, if they refuse to accept the appeal then its PE's fault and not the drivers. Then the driver has done no wrong.

 

By the way was the driver given at a serviceable address?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Armadillo, life is too short to get into a technical argument with parkingeye.

 

 

Please make sure that you do not appeal on mitigation but on winning points, the killer being GPEOL. There are lots of winning examples here and elsewhere on the net.

 

 

I wish that everyone who gets a PCN would complain long and loud to their MP, it was Parliament that passed a badly draft, badly considered law and the only way to get real action is to make your MP aware of your anger. You could also ask why parkingeye's owner, Capita who are largely dependant on public sector contracts think it is OK to [problem] the public.

 

 

If you want tell Capita what a rubbish company they own their new CEO is Andy Parker, I am sure he would be pleased to hear from you.

Martin g

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the replies and thoughts to all.

 

A three sentence appeal to POPLA now will see the charge cancelled in two months (?), with the one letter. ..

 

Three sentence appeal? Genuine pre-estimate of Loss/ Contract/ UTCCR? Would these suffice?

 

Appeal to POPLA explain that the driver was named, received their own PCN and that PE sent the rejection letter to the keeper, if they refuse to accept the appeal then its PE's fault and not the drivers. Then the driver has done no wrong.

 

By the way was the driver given at a serviceable address?

 

Yes, the driver is at a serviceable address. This is what gets to me, PE have already sent a letter some weeks back, addressing the Parking Charge to the driver. Within the letter it states "...Your details have been provided to us by the registered keeper, naming you as the driver of the above vehicle at the time of the parking event. As such, you are now required to pay or appeal this Parking Charge..."

 

The driver appealed in his name.

 

So, I find it strange (not surprisingly) that they have sent the rejection letter/ POPLA code in the name of the registered driver. Who, taking the above quote into account, is not liable for the Parking Charge... am I right? Which is why I was thinking that just waiting the 35 days, would kill the ticket dead. I mean, PE cocked up as far as I can see.

 

 

Please make sure that you do not appeal on mitigation but on winning points, the killer being GPEOL. There are lots of winning examples here and elsewhere on the net.

 

As above, Genuine pre-estimate of Loss/ Contract/ UTCCR? Would these suffice?

 

-----------------------------------------------

 

I just got a copy of the rejection letter... it actually states the following:

 

"... We also note that a number of your 'queries' are of a generic nature, a number of which we have seen before..."

 

Are they taking the peas? The Registered Keeper has not sent any queries. Only two letters were sent by the RK, (1) Giving driver details (2) Same letter again (as they were too stupid to actually read the 1st letter.)

 

So I don't see where anything is generic nor do I see where any are even queries.

 

The general consensus seems to be to use the appeal code to popla. So, I take I just do it in the RK's name? Would they turn around and say, actually the driver details were provided to PE, so we can't accept the appeal cos you're not liable... and then get more BS in the drivers name later down the line...

 

Thanks for the help and advice.

 

Regards


CookieRocks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for all the replies and thoughts to all.

 

 

 

Three sentence appeal? Genuine pre-estimate of Loss/ Contract/ UTCCR? Would these suffice?

 

Yes.

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, the driver is at a serviceable address. This is what gets to me, PE have already sent a letter some weeks back, addressing the Parking Charge to the driver. Within the letter it states "...Your details have been provided to us by the registered keeper, naming you as the driver of the above vehicle at the time of the parking event. As such, you are now required to pay or appeal this Parking Charge..."

 

The driver appealed in his name.

 

So, I find it strange (not surprisingly) that they have sent the rejection letter/ POPLA code in the name of the registered driver. Who, taking the above quote into account, is not liable for the Parking Charge... am I right? Which is why I was thinking that just waiting the 35 days, would kill the ticket dead. I mean, PE cocked up as far as I can see.

 

Waiting 35 days would not kill the ticket dead. More correspondence would have to be entered into.

 

 

As above, Genuine pre-estimate of Loss/ Contract/ UTCCR? Would these suffice?

 

-----------------------------------------------

 

I just got a copy of the rejection letter... it actually states the following:

 

"... We also note that a number of your 'queries' are of a generic nature, a number of which we have seen before..."

 

Are they taking the peas? The Registered Keeper has not sent any queries. Only two letters were sent by the RK, (1) Giving driver details (2) Same letter again (as they were too stupid to actually read the 1st letter.)

 

So I don't see where anything is generic nor do I see where any are even queries.

 

 

Most of their replies to any appeal/request contain generic responses.

 

The general consensus seems to be to use the appeal code to popla. So, I take I just do it in the RK's name? Would they turn around and say, actually the driver details were provided to PE, so we can't accept the appeal cos you're not liable... and then get more BS in the drivers name later down the line...

 

 

 

Do as esmerobbo advises then.

 

Thanks for the help and advice.

 

Regards

 

 

AS reg keeper appeal to POPLA stating -

I am not liable for this charge.

Please could PE provide, through sight of contract, that they have the legal right to pursue parking charge notices.

Please could PE provide a breakdown of the genuine pre estimate of loss that this charge must represent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Parking Eye blinded (again!) :whoo:

Thanks to all for their help and input.

 

Regards

 

Edited to add: The overstay was almost 8 hours :-o


CookieRocks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done CookieRocks,

 

That's cost 'em another few quid !!! :-D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well done CookieRocks,

 

That's cost 'em another few quid !!! :-D

 

Cheers f16. Money well spent for them me thinks

 

Well done!

Out of interest, how was your POPLA appeal worded?

 

Cheers armadillo71.

 

To be fair, the gist of it mainly incorporated your post #10, along with a bullet point of what was sent back and forth before it went to POPLA. I've attached the first page of my appeal, there were 3 further pages which was basically added from a template I found elsewhere.

 

So, I appreciate your help from earlier a lot. It surprises me that it seems that PE almost didn't bother respond to the appeal as soon as it was with POPLA. I'm guessing they knew they cocked up, by rejecting the soft appeal to the registered keeper, when they clearly had the driver details. Either way, money well spent by them, plus it just goes to show whether it is a 1 minute, 10 minute or 8 hours overstay, they generally are a bunch of thieving buggers preying on the easy payers.

 

Regards


CookieRocks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no they didnt cocl-up on rejecting your soft appeal, the truth is that they have no rights to any money in the first place but 99.9% of people dont know this. They are defending their business and so will do almost anything to get the money but defending a correctly worded appeal is now just a loss maker for them so they dont bother throwing money at it and that include photocopying costs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
no they didnt cocl-up on rejecting your soft appeal, the truth is that they have no rights to any money in the first place but 99.9% of people dont know this. They are defending their business and so will do almost anything to get the money but defending a correctly worded appeal is now just a loss maker for them so they dont bother throwing money at it and that include photocopying costs.

 

I totally get what you are saying and agree.

 

All I meant in regards to cocking up the soft appeal is that I had appealed in the drivers name, as that had been provided to PE, yet they rejected the appeal (obviously) but sent it and the POPLA code to the registered keeper, who has nothing to do with it anymore.

 

But, by-the-by, alls done and sorted.


CookieRocks

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...