Jump to content


Correspondence from Parking eye Mansfield


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2842 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hello. Can you help me with a PCN I've received from Parking Eye in Mansfield St. Peters Retail Park?

 

This site won't allow me to PM until I hit 30 posts :-(

 

I'm struggling to get to grips with no contract can be formed as the ANPR & signs do not have planning permission. I think this might be my get out of jail free card.

 

Any help would be appreciated.

 

Thank you

ChasLad

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello and welcome to CAG.

 

I've moved you to a thread of your own so you can have advice specific to your own problem. We don't do advice by PM, there's no reason why this can't be discussed on open forum, the guys should be along over the course of the day. :)

 

My best, HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry. The question was aimed at Polyplastic as he/she seems to have an indepth knowledge of this particular park.

 

I've just found a link to show planning permission for the ANPR & signs was granted on the 21st March 2016, so possibly no help to me :-(

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 Date of the infringement

 

04/05/2016

 

2 Date on the NTK

 

10/05/2016

 

3 Date received

 

18/05/2016

 

 

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012?

 

Yes.

 

 

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event?

 

Yes. Photo's of in & out

 

 

6 Have you appealed?

Have you had a response?

 

No action taken as yet.

 

 

7 Who is the parking company?

 

Parking Eye

 

 

For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under.

There are two official bodies, the BPA and the IAS. If you are unsure, please check here

 

BPA.

Edited by honeybee13
Font size.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi and welcome to CAG

 

It seems the NTK is just in time so no get out there.

 

How long were you there? Did you overstay? If so, how long?

 

If you spent any amount of money there, you could contact the store(s) and complain.

 

These tickets are not a penalty charge and as such, PE need to go to court to enforce payment.

 

If you haven't appealed as yet, do not name the driver. PE will no doubt reject you but they will issue a POPLA code so that you can escalate.

 

In the meantime, if there any pictures of the signs, post them here and read a lot more about this particular car park

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

you need to check with the council as to whether the planning permission had been grnted because there were objections to PE's application for the cameras etc. The planning dept will be well aware of this so you should get a very quick answer. If no PP, then you should make a complaint to both the council and trading standards for fraud as they were barred from any activity..

If PP granted in the last month then you will have to come back here and we will try and offer updated advice based on that info.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you need to check with the council as to whether the planning permission had been grnted because there were objections to PE's application for the cameras etc. The planning dept will be well aware of this so you should get a very quick answer. If no PP, then you should make a complaint to both the council and trading standards for fraud as they were barred from any activity..

If PP granted in the last month then you will have to come back here and we will try and offer updated advice based on that info.

 

As far as I can tell PP was granted 21/03/16

 

Sorry, can't post links. Can't PM . . . gonna try a piccy next :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

as far as you can tell? then recheck as that seems to be further back than I recall for them even applying. Dont rely on the planning portal on the council website, ask them as there were objections and the chances are any planning permission granted has caveats.

Link to post
Share on other sites

as far as you can tell? then recheck as that seems to be further back than I recall for them even applying. Dont rely on the planning portal on the council website, ask them as there were objections and the chances are any planning permission granted has caveats.

 

As far as I can tell . . . . PP was granted 21/03/16. I am no more a planning permission expert as I am a banana. Sorry, I only have half of a propellor on top of my head but I did manage to find MDC's internet record of the planning case . . . to which I would dearly love to post you a link.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully, this link will work to the planning decisions pdf's

 

http://www.mansfield.gov.uk/Fastweb/images.asp

 

nope. Bear with me

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have come to the conclusion that not reporting lack of planning permission is better as most PE sites don't have it and it is then an CoP failure that can be used at POPLA.

 

Polyplastics arguments are valid but judges seem to ignore PE's lack of interest in complying with the law.

 

PE signage is usually clear and they take no prisoners.

 

Is it Morrisons or ALdi? Complaining to the store is the best initial action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

POPLA dont accept the lack of PP as a reason for appealing even though the parking co is committing a criminal act.

 

Having seen the attchaed downlaods

all I can say that is PE must have friends to get their plans though in 2 days

when everyone else would have to wait a couple of months for public comments etc.

 

What does this mean?

Well they will have new signs so the wording will be correct,

their NTK arrived on the last day it can without being timed out

so it is down to whether or not you breached the contract offered

 

 

tell us the details of why they issued you with the NTK.

Not paying?

overstay?

parking in wrong place?

 

 

TBH it may be difficult to avoid having to pay out on this one

unless they have either a very marginal cause of action

or you have a good circumstance that they dont know about.

 

 

Some things, like putting the wrong reg number in the ticket machine will be lost at POPLA

but you win at court as the matter is "de minimis"

but our aim is to try and avoid going there as it can be a bit of a lottery.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest.

 

 

It was a period in time that we would have visited the area regularly & frequently over a period of about 5 days.

I don't remember an occasion when " I " parked this vehicle or even when " WE " parked in this particular park.

 

To clarify.

The missus & myself have access to 2x vehicles.

We are out & about frequently in each others cars, both together & singularly.

 

 

Over a period of 3 days either side of the alleged infringement it could have been both of us

or either of us who parked there.

 

 

In my defence . .

. the missus has done this sort of thing before.

 

 

Parked up & to hell with the consequences . .

. 'cos she's not the one paying

& she's not the one spending hours

& hours trying to sort out the mess.

 

Will the ' Hamilton ' defence cut any ice?

It was either me or her & although I'm fairly sure it was her I'm still the one paying out !

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Hamilton defence will not work unless this is 'double dip' where separate drivers go into a car park contravening 'no return in two hours'. POFA 2012 brings keeper liability.

 

You have to go through the NTK with a fine toothcomb. Read the POFA 2012 legislation. Period of parking etc. Prominent signage?

 

With the BEAVIS ruling PE are hard to beat except on technicalities.

 

Giving the retailers a hard time is the best thing with PE. Morrison's have given up trying to defend PE's antics and cancel easily as the landowner is entitled to do. I'm certain as soon as PE's contract is up with Morrison's they will be ditched as have Asda done with Smart (Asda sales down 5%, Smart won't have helped). Giving the CEO of a retailer a bad Monday morning is my favourite pastime. They need customers more than you need them, so first port of call is the retailer with copy receipts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Hamilton defence will not work unless this is 'double dip' where separate drivers go into a car park contravening 'no return in two hours'. POFA 2012 brings keeper liability.

 

You have to go through the NTK with a fine toothcomb. Read the POFA 2012 legislation. Period of parking etc. Prominent signage?

 

With the BEAVIS ruling PE are hard to beat except on technicalities.

 

Giving the retailers a hard time is the best thing with PE. Morrison's have given up trying to defend PE's antics and cancel easily as the landowner is entitled to do. I'm certain as soon as PE's contract is up with Morrison's they will be ditched as have Asda done with Smart (Asda sales down 5%, Smart won't have helped). Giving the CEO of a retailer a bad Monday morning is my favourite pastime. They need customers more than you need them, so first port of call is the retailer with copy receipts.

 

I'll just pay up then.

 

It leaves a very bitter taste in my mouth, but I just don't have the time for fine toothed combs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately most of the PPC's are as bad as each other

but you have to hand it to PE they are very professional money extractors.

 

 

You have to let the retailer know that they are losing sales by over-zealous parking management.

 

Fit a dash-cam so you have a record of every visit to a private car park.

Mine has saved the cost already in a bus lane case.

 

Sorry if I'm being at bit negative but if you haven't time to deal timely and judiciously with these things,

pay up and never use that car park and retailers again.

The internet is far easier way of shopping anyway.

 

(That's the sting in the tail for the PPC's who read these threads)

Edited by Fox247
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you do decide to pay up then make sure that the retailers at the site know all about it. They are tenants of the developer and have little influence but if enough complaints are lodged about the same thing they can go to a rent tribunal and then the landlord may well take notice that their thoughlessness is going to cost them money for a long time. Copy your complaint to the local paper and also question how the planning application for the was dealt with in such a short time and granted when all of the activity that lead to the application was illegal.

If you dont complain then nothing will ever happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Ive just joing to tag onto this thread. My appeal is still ongoing from before Christmas, I was one of the ones caught in the traffic that the Chad detailed chad.co.uk/news/local/parking-company-offers-to-refund-leisure-park-fines-1-7732512

 

What does the lack of PP mean for my case please, can I push that road now as theyre not budging on the Chad article statement of refunds/cancellations

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

it means they are [edited] and they know it. If you paid them then sue them for a refund. Just letting them have a lba telling them that you are more than happy to do this will probably be enough as they are going to get clobbered by at least one class action and maybe a second on this very point.

I say they are [Edited] because they have lost cout claims over this very issue so they cant sayn they didnt know

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can I ask that users refrain from posting certain words that could be classed as defamatory at least, Libel at worst. Many may think that Parking Eye are [edited] :| but we have to be very careful what we say. If you cannot think of another word, use stars instead.

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...