Parking Eye Defence preparation - ***Resolved subject to Notice of Discontinuance***

[HebeG]

28/07/16

My company received a parking charge notice (dated 27/07/16) for £100 reduced to £60 if paid within 14 days.

Included photo evidence of me entering private car park in my company car at Thistle Hotels - The Quay Poole time stamped arrival time 09.28 and departure time 12.01

 

It refers to the signage and to Protection of Freedoms Act 2104

The date of event was 02/07/16

Date issued was 27/07/16

 

It stated reason for charge as either not purchasing the appropriate parking time or by remaining at car park longer than permitted, in accordance with t's and c's and so was not clear what the breach was for.

 

I remembered that I had encountered problems with the pay for parking phone line and so assumed it must have been because the payment had not gone through and therefore I hadn't paid for parking the vehicle.

I immediately wrote to Parking Eye (dated 28/07/16) and appealed on that basis.

 

Parking Eye response was unsuccessful.

The response now stated that it was because I had not paid the correct amount for the time parked and provided an appeals reference for POPLA.

 

With the new information I did further research and discovered via the Pay for Parking web site that I had paid for 2 hours parking commencing 9.52 so in actual fact I was only 8 minutes over 2 hours when I left the parking site at 12.01.

 

The time between entering the site 9.28 and the payment going through 9.52 was taken up with

finding a space,

going to the payment machine to read terms,

taking down phone number and site ref for pay for parking,

returning to car and then making 4 phone calls to pay for parking

because I first had to enter new debit card details

and then there was something wrong

and the payment would not go through

( I have print screen from call logs on my phone that day showing calls in my attempts to pay for parking at 9.40, 9.44, and 2 at 9.51)

 

In conclusion I was delayed in making payment due to issues with the parking payment system,

I did pay for 2 hours, I was 8 mins over (I am allowed 10 mins over) I am therefore not in breach of contract.

 

Once I realised this I made a second attempt to appeal with Parking Eye via the website, due to time limits,

I didn't receive a response to this appeal,

and I had subsequently now missed the timescale to appeal via POPLA.

 

 

I received a further notice to pay and then a court claim was received sometime after 24th October.

 

I have sent an acknowledgement of service via the money claim website so I can further defend the claim.

 

I would be most grateful for any advise on the best approach with regards to the defence I put forward.

[ericsbrother]

your problem was that yopu responded in the first person to a notive that was timed out under the POFA and would have otherwise whithered on the vine.

 

However, as you have evidnec eof trying to pay then you can claim that it was not a breaqch of contract but what is called a "frustrated contract" where each party has failed to continue with its obligations to perform to that contract.

 

There is also a line of attack that is even stronger than this and that is a lack of planning permission for their signage under the Town and Country Planning Act 2007. You can send a letter of "discovery" to PE under CPR31.14 and ask them for sight of their contract with the LANDOWNER that assigns the right to enter into contracts with customers of the hotel and to make civil claims in their own name. likewise sight of the planning permission for their signage and apparatus. Give them 14 days to respond.

 

In the meanwhile submit a skeleton defence of 1) no contract entered into as PE dont planning permission for their signage and you cannot be in a criminal compact with them

 

2) and in any case you attempted to pay but their system failed to accept yoir money so it is a frustrated contract and not a breah of contract.

 

dont go into any real detail at this stage or you limit yourself. PE are not likely to answer your CPR31.14 because they know you are right about the second part of it at least. thye may even have signed a contract with a third party so they thus dont havelocus standi but again they try and keep that from the court in the eary stages and often lie about it later.

 

Dont say anything about what you have as far as documents etc, that is for when you exchange evidence bundles and you may have more to add before then.

Edited November 10, 2016 by honeybee13
Paras.

[HebeG]

Many thanks for your advice ericsbrother, its much appreciated.

 

Can I just check on the planning permission point "You can send a letter of "discovery" to PE under CPR31.14 and ask them for sight of their contract with the LANDOWNER that assigns the right to enter into contracts with customers of the hotel"

Would this still be relevent even if I was not a customer of the hotel? The car park is open for anyone to use and is not restricted to customers of the hotel.

[ericsbrother]

of course, the planning is a mandatory requirement and so is the contract. If the wording of their contract limits them to just customers of the hotel then you are a trespasser and no contract can be formed with you. you get them both ways by using this wording. If their contract doesnt allow them to form contracts with the hotel's customers how are they able to issues notice at all.

[HebeG]

I followed your advice Ericsbrother and within a couple of days of sending the letter, I received a response from PE to say upon further review the matter had been closed.... Result! and I hadn't even got to the point of logging my defence with the court.

I just want to say a huge thanks for your advise and help, I have made a donation to the CAG.

[honeybee13]

Thank you very much for the donation, HebeG.

 

I'm delighted this has worked out for you and will adjust your thread title to reflect the result.

 

If you haven't already, you might like to thank ericsbrother and others who helped you by clicking on their reputation star on the bottom left of their post and leaving a short message.

 

HB

[BazzaS]

Don' t forget to continue with the process of:

a) acknowledging service of the claim,

b) issuing a defence (even if that defence is "they've told me they are discontinuing the claim, and I ask the court to allow me to submit a more detailed defence if this turns out not to be the case).

 

If "the left hand doesn't know what the right is doing"(by accident or design!), they could get a default judgment in their favour.

When you get formal notification from PE : keep it in case they don't discontinue!

When you get notification from the court (or can see it is discontinued online on MCOL) : you can relax

 

Congrats on the win!

[HebeG]

ahh ok will do BazzaS, thanks..... I wouldn't have thought to do that !

[ericsbrother]

They knew about the PP all along,

they ahve lost other claims because of that nearly a year ago

but would rather keep quiet than apply for PP,

which is free but risks them not getting it for cameras and other equipment.

 

They won a case recently where they sued,

didnt have PP but applied for retrospective permission and won

because of case law regarding a house purchase and retrospective contracts presumably applies.

 

 

I am getting opinions on whether the contract would be formed if you knew they didnt have PP and so acted accordingly as that invokes a different bit of case law and makes the contract void.

[dx100uk]

phone the court mid week and ask if the claim has been discontinued.

 

 

dx