Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Parking Charge Morrisons Nantwich - ParkingEye


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2851 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,

 

1 Date of the infringement - 20/05/2016

 

2 Date on the NTK - 25/05/2016

 

3 Date received - 31/05/2016

 

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, two photos of my car as I am entering and leaving the car park

 

6 Have you appealed? No

 

Have you had a response? No

 

7 Who is the parking company? ParkingEye

 

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

 

The car park is FREE. The maximum stay is 1 hours 30 minutes. I have stayed 2 hours 30 minutes. They are asking me to pay a charge of £85, which is reduced to £50 if I pay within 14 days.

 

Would you be able to walk me through the process of cancelling this? I have read some similar threads, but I am unsure if they are still relevant today - May, 2016.

 

This is what I found in a different thread:

 

[old letter removed - dx]

Thank you!

Link to post
Share on other sites

**Update**

 

Just to clarify that this was a parking charge notice that I received in the mail, with two pictures of my car entering and leaving.

 

Also, I have e-mailed Morrisons to complain about the incident.

 

Any ideas appreciated, thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

That template is out of date, do not send it.

 

Complaining to Morrisons is the correct way to get this cancelled initially, if you have included a receipt.

 

Wait for their response before you contact PE if needed, with our help of course.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You won't have to pay anything at all. Sit tight and wait for Eric and others to advise

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have complained to Morrisons, but I haven't included a receipt as I don't have one.

 

What is the chance of them cancelling the parking charge? I wouldn't want to mess it up and pay the higher charge of £85.

 

Did you actually shop in the store?

 

What was your complaint to Morrisons?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I did enter the store, but I don't remember if I purchased anything, so I definitely don't have a receipt. I then went on to do other business in town..

 

It was along the lines that being a loyal Morrisons customer I was disappointed and shocked to receive a parking charge in return for my shopping at their store. Also, mentioned that I would stop being their customer and would advise the same to my friends and family.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well you may be lucky and Morrisons cancel it without a receipt. PE certainly won't without one.

 

Check with your planning office about permission for the PE signage and time limits.

 

You have 28 days to appeal to PE so there is time to investigate the signage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, thanks for the information.

 

Would you be able to clarify what you mean by : "Check with your planning office about permission for the PE signage and time limits."

 

I e-mailed the planning office at cheshireeast the following:

 

"Hello,

 

Would you be able to provide me with the permisson for Parking Eye signage and time limits of the car park.

 

Thank you!

 

Kind regards, "

 

Is that sufficient and correct?

 

Thanks for the help!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have already checked that page, but couldn't find anything related to "ParkingEye" or its derivatives and "parking" entries are too many. I am not quite certain what I am looking for anyway.

 

**Update**

 

I'm not sure what I am looking for, but when I searched for morrison's postcode, it came back with the following.. attached image.

There is no mention of their car park or any development of that sort.

Capture.jpg

Edited by citronadeo
Link to post
Share on other sites

If its anew store, they will have permission, although Morrisons are phasing out the use of PPC's now . The older stores do not have permission int he majority so it pays to check.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

 

I am not sure if it's a new store or not. It looks like it has been there for a while as in the attachment above there are developments dated 2007. I am not sure what exact permission you are talking about and how I could find out. I have posted what the email I sent to the council too.

 

Thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ask the council planning dept if PE have applied for and been granted planning permission for their signage and cameras under the advertising hoardings regs of the Town and Country Planning Act (last amended 2014) They need it and it is not deemed consent so dont take any bull. However, once they apply it is a nod throught as a mere formality anywhere other than a conservation area.

Link to post
Share on other sites

These are the e-mails I sent them:

Hello,

 

Would you be able to provide me with the permission for Parking Eye signage and time limits of the car park.

 

Thank you!

 

Kind regards,

 

 

me to planning

Show more

3:47 PM

Hello,

 

To clarify I'm looking for advertisement consent for Parking Eye's Parking at Morrisons (Station Rd, Nantwich, North West CW5 5SP) - signs and planning permission for their cameras.

 

Thank you!

 

Kind regards,

Link to post
Share on other sites

use the terminology stated, that is the law they have to submit PP under, just using a vague request will get you a vague answer.

You can also ask if there are restictions in the planning application for the store regarding time limits for customer parking.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not entirely sure what terminology to use, everyone is being a bit vague.

 

They haven't replied yet, but I'll add this into my emails. I'm emailing [email protected].

 

I'm worried the time will pass and I I'll have to pay the higher fee. What do you think? Neither them nor morrisons are replying so far.

 

Thanks for the help! Appreciated!

Link to post
Share on other sites

You dont have to pay anything. There are no time limits. PPC's make them up as they go along. None of them have any real standing.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you! If you are really sure that I'll be able to dodge this, I'll do so, I really don't want to drag it to courts though. I am still waiting for replies from the council and Morrisons.

 

Many thanks for your help!

Link to post
Share on other sites

ask the council whether Parking Eye or Morrisons have planning permission for the cameras and signage used by PE under the advertising hoardings regs of the Town and Country Planning Act. Morrisons will have PP for their signs as they will have them for the big lit up sign on the front of the store etc but it is usual for PE to "forget" that they need it for their contract signs or claim that it is not needed (deemed consent-which is not true) or that they expect Morrisons to apply on their behalf.

So be specific about the signs you are enquiring about and quote the legislation so it isnt confused with any other planning consent. If they have it the council will have a little map of where the signs are, how big they are and what they say.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your help people. This has now been cancelled.

 

The way I resolved is by contacting Morrisons and explaining the situation. They called me a few days later to confirm it is now cancelled and that I'll receive a paper copy of this decision.

 

Yayy!

Link to post
Share on other sites

They know it cant be enforced. Theyre trying to end their contract with parking eye which is why molst of their stores dont have PPC's running the car park. Sadly, parking eye have very one sided contracts with their clients.

  • Confused 1

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...