Court of Appeal judgment in ParkingEye Limited -v- Beavis, POPLA - Statement by the Lead Adjudicator.

[ericsbrother]

As said it doesnt understand what it has signed and as it isnt costing them to maintain this presence of mini Hitlers, doesnt want to take the time to learn.

I would love to see the contract between parking co and landlord, not because I think it faulty but would love to see what level of employee Aldi get to sign these things. I bet that it is not some executive but some lowly admin person who hasnt had to shove it under the noses of the corporate lawyer becasue that would cost the company a few quid in fees. They do everything on the cheap but the higher ticket supermarkets are no better.

[Mike_hawk]

Its an oddity in the effect of ANPR equipped sites for sure....... could you lawfully possess an area of land on the basis that you have contracted with the PPC to park in excess of the free period? If it's trespass the event occurs the moment you overstay not on a whim of the landowner

 

Would the courts interfere where it was found beneficiary to the contracting party to breach the contract?

 

Our local Tesco, Morrisons and CO-OP binned their respective PPC's when it was pointed out to each that they may not have any lawful redress to remove vehicles parked subject to contract......... I don't know what the answer is and I'm not sure they did but I guess if it ever came to a decision in court it could be an expensive argument for either side.

[armadillo71]

Following the Court of Appeal judgment in ParkingEye Limited -v- Beavis, an appeal has now been filed at the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom.

Before judgement was handed down by the Court of Appeal, we received applications for the adjournment of POPLA appeals, in cases where it was submitted that the Court’s decision would have an impact on the outcome of the POPLA appeal. These applications were granted. Assessors also adjourned cases of their own motion, where it appeared that there was no other issue upon which the appeal could properly be determined.

The above case having now been filed at the Supreme Court and after careful consideration, the same practice as outlined previously and as applied in the courts, will now be followed as regards all similar applications for adjournment. Further, this also means that where it appears to the Assessor that a POPLA appeal raises the same issue, and there is no other ground upon which the appeal can be determined, the matter will be adjourned.

http://www.popla.org.uk/ParkingEyeLimited-v-Beavis.htm

 

 

 

 

ParkingEye wanted and got, cases stayed at POPLA until the Beavis case was heard at the Court of Appeal.

 

 

They 'won' the at the Court of Appeal.

 

 

An appeal has now been filed at the Supreme Court.

 

 

I believe that PE have ' bitten themselves on the b*m'....

 

Could every appeal to POPLA potentially be stayed?

[DragonFly1967]

So, anyone appealing to POPLA for a decision on a ParklingLie ticket needs to do so on grounds other than GPEoL for the time being. Should be easy enough

[ericsbrother]

so, if every person who gets a PE NTK appeals on GPEOL they wont earn a penny for at least 2 years. I wonder if they have considered that? can their business survive that long without any cashflow.

[Shelley181146]

so, if every person who gets a PE NTK appeals on GPEOL they wont earn a penny for at least 2 years. I wonder if they have considered that? can their business survive that long without any cashflow.

 

Together with getting booted off Retail Car Parks for the amount of complaints that retailers are getting, I hope they go out of business before it gets to the Supreme Courts.

[Capt Slog]

The other half has just got her PCN reminder from PE and it has on it about how they WON the case and recommended that we read about it on their website. Haven't bothered, just sent of the appeal using GPEOL.

[DragonFly1967]

Whilst I hate myself for doing so.... Giving Parking Lie the benefit of the doubt for the moment, what's the date on the reminder? Barry Beavis only filed his appeal with the Supreme Court on 3rd June, so I'd say that if it's dated on or before 3rd June they couldn't have mentioned the appeal.

 

Anything dated after 3rd June (so 4th onwards) could see Parking Lie snorkeling in brown stuff should they be stupid enough to proceed to court.

[Capt Slog]

Reminder was dated before appeal date. PE still have it on their website though as of 5 minutes ago.

[ericsbrother]

And?

they arent the law