Parking Eye are at it again.......

[Shelley181146]

Having attended a funeral the return journey was quite an emotional one as you can imagine so I pulled over into a services on the motorway as I didn't feel well to get breath of fresh air, to freshen up and as it had been a stressful day I ended up having 40 winks as I was totally drained. It wasn't planned but I think the events of the day had took their toll.

 

A few days later the registered keeper of the vehicle received a PCN from PE charging £100 for purportedly over-staying the 2 hours free parking. A 'discount' is offered to £60 if paid within 14 days blah, blah! Amazed is all I can say.......

 

As this hasn't been acknowledged or paid they have sent a reminder.

 

Neither document states they are NTK it just has VRNP photograph which is in the dark on both photographs and could be anywhere actually.

 

Someone has been back to the services and photographic evidence has been taken both as stills and video.

 

The intention is to appeal this matter but as the legal case (Beavis) is due to be heard this month wondered what Caggers opinions were on this matter please.

[armadillo71]

Beavis makes no difference to whether you appeal this now.

 

The RK needs to appeal this in the timeframe to either get a cancellation of charge or rejection letter.

Which must include a POPLA code

 

Then we go from there....

[Stigman]

Completely agree with Armadillo71 above, the Registered Keeper must appeal to Parking Eye within the time frame.

Parking Eye will near enough automatically reject this, but ask for a POPLA code if they do.

Go to POPLA, appeal & win on GPEOL and POPLA charges Parking Eye £27.

 

Stigman

[Nev Met]

Appeal to Parking Eye as the Registered Keeper ONLY as follows (either by their online appeals portal or by post (if post GET PROOF OF POSTAGE)) :-

 

Your name

Your Address

 

Date

 

A Formal Appeal Against A Parking Charge

 

Dear Sir

 

Your ref; Parking Charge number xxxxxxxx

 

Whilst the DVLA may have informed you that I was the registered keeper of the motor vehicle in question, at this stage I make no admission as to the identity of the either the keeper or the driver at the material time.

 

This appeal is on the following grounds:-

 

• Your Notice does not comply with the statutory requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and you are therefore legally barred from pursuing the keeper.

 

• The £100 parking charge is excessive. It does not represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss caused by the alleged parking contravention; as such it is a legally unenforceable penalty charge.

 

• You do not have sufficient contractual authority from the landowner to issue and enforce parking charge notices.

 

You have set out your case in your parking charge notice; this is the response and the formal appeal.

 

You therefore have two options;

 

1) Either accept the grounds of appeal and cancel the parking charge

Or

2) Refuse the appeal and provide me with the unique 10 digit code in order that the matter can be properly referred to POPLA for independent adjudication.

 

Finally, I have nothing further to add to this appeal and therefore will not respond to any further correspondence with your company; so either cancel the parking charge or provide the POPLA code as required by your industry Code of Practice.

 

Kind regards

 

(Print the name of the Registered Keeper here - do NOT sign it)

[Shelley181146]

Thats good enough for me. Thank you.

[Shelley181146]

Here's the replies received

[armadillo71]

Good news!

That reply though has no relevance to what your appeal was if you used post#4...

[Stigman]

Great news Shelley, Keep the letter safe.

 

Stigman

[Shelley181146]

Great news Shelley, Keep the letter safe.

 

Stigman

 

Thanks Stigman and armadillo.

I tweaked post 4 and it seems to have worked and all correspondence is safely locked away

This forum gives people the confidence to challenge such things.

Really appreciate my CAG family x

[ericsbrother]

They have shot themselves in the foot by admitting they act on behlaf of the landowner. This means they cannot charge in their own name. Bit like an estate agent cannot dictate ant contract between buyer and house owner.

[Shelley181146]

They have shot themselves in the foot by admitting they act on behlaf of the landowner. This means they cannot charge in their own name. Bit like an estate agent cannot dictate ant contract between buyer and house owner.

 

It almost makes me want to be rebelious and return to do it again, then highlight the error of their ways but I do have a life and have better things to do with my time