Jump to content
deks36

Parking Eye- Mayflower terminal short stay southampton ** PE Folded at POPLA **

Recommended Posts

Hi Guys Ive made the mistake before of ignoring a PCN so this time I intend to respond properly.

 

I received a notice in the post today received by one of my taxi drivers who failed to mention to me that he went into the car park or that the ticket machine wasn't working

 

on questioning today when i received the PCN he said the person he spoke to had no clue as to what he should do..

 

the car is 140 miles away from my location and its unlikely I will be going that way anytime soon..

 

1 Date of the infringement 28/5/18

 

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 07/07/18

 

3 Date received 11/07/18

 

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [y/n?] no

 

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes

 

6 Have you appealed? {y/n?] post up your appeal] No

 

Have you had a response? [Y/N?]

 

7 Who is the parking company?parkingeye

 

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Mayflower terminal short stay southampton

 

the reverse of the PCN states"

 

" We originally wrote to the registered keeper of the vehicle whose details were held by the DVLA at the time of the event and they informed us that you were responsible at the time of the parking event"

 

I am now and have been since June 2016 the registered keeper and owner of the vehicle.

 

I have not made any representation to them or anyone else about the this event or any other event as to who was the owner or driver of the vehicle at any time

Edited by dx100uk
Spacing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe so. PCN gives no actual address but on the basis Mayflower is the terminal in the port and the drivers comments I would say it is in the port

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oh

 

does the time lapse from event to letter sent not count?

 

I am the registered keeper and they claim to have already contacted me to be advised I was responsible for the vehicle at the time which is amusing in itself.

its taken 40 days for a letter to be sent to me

 

...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, they only know your name as the RK and NOT the driver yes?

 

 

If so then their is no keeper liability as they are out of time, going by the dates you've posted.

 

 

But the experts will advise on your next step.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes the letter is address to me a the registered keeper and not as the driver as I wasn't

thanks for your input

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hang on folks...

 

I have a vague recollection of ParkingLie losing a case and being told in no uncertain terms not to bring any further cases for Port Authority land. Can anyone else remember it?

 

 

If I'm right and if this car park is inside the port gates, it will have its own byelaws and will not be relevant land for the purposes of the POFA and therefore there is no keeper liability. Only the Port Authority can take action, it's naff all to do with ParkingLie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One to keep under your hat for now. This is a previous POPLOL decision on Town Quay, Southampton. Which is also ABP land and is covered by exactly the same byelaws. The last paragraph is the important one for this case (highlighted).

 

 

POPLA Appeal Allowed 21st May 2015 (POPLA Reference 6060755093)

 

It is the Operator's case that their Terms and Conditions of parking ("the Terms") are clearly displayed throughout the above named site. They submit the Appellant breached the Terms by failing to purchase the appropriate parking time and therefore is liable to pay the parking charge.

 

The Appellant has made several very strong submissions however it is only necessary to consider determine one area of dispute for the purposes of this appeal. This is the submission that the Operator has no authority from the Landowner to issue parking charges on the land.

 

The Operator has not provided a copy of a contract between themselves and the Landowner which authorises them to operate at the site and to issue parking charges on the Landowner's behalf; nor have they provided a signed witness statement confirming the existence of such a contract. Therefore, I cannot find the parking charge to be enforceable by the Operator in this case.

 

I think it is important to add that I also accept the Appellant's submission that the land is not 'relevant land' for the purposes of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ("POFA") because this was their main submission. I find that the land is subject to statutory control for the reasons given by the Appellant and therefore, by virtue of paragraph 3(1)© of Schedule 4 of POFA, the Operator has no right to recover under POFA.

 

Accordingly, I allow the appeal.

 

Ricky Powell

Assessor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks guys.. really appreciate the advice.

 

Now to work on my appeal to PE and then no doubt ultimately POPLA

 

I doubt this is relevant but ill mention it

 

on the 18/6/18 I removed the cherished plate from this vehicle to which this letter applies and replaced it with its original registration

 

so from that I can deduce wrongly or rightly that PE must have got the details prior to this date

 

I dont know if this has any relevance or not but worth a mention if it makes my task easier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For ParkingLie. I would go something along the lines of...

 

 

Dear Shysters

 

I write with reference to your Notice to Keeper No: XXXXXXXXXXX.

 

Nice try, but as you are well aware, the Mayflower Terminal (Southampton Docks) is not relevant land for the purposes of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, and as such there is no keeper liability to Parking Eye or anyone else.

 

I now expect a reply to say that you are dropping the matter and an apology for having had the impudence to waste my time, and don't think that I'll accept any baloney about it being a "Gesture of Goodwill" either, or a valid POPLA code.

 

 

Print you name

Recorded Keeper

Do not actually sign it.

 

 

You do not need to be polite to these clowns!

 

 

 

Keep your powder dry on anything else at the moment. All you want is either a withdrawal or a POPLOL code :thumb:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

agree with DF, if no ticket slapped on vehicle they are trying to misuse the various protocols of the POFA to try and make you think their wording actually is correct when it isnt.

 

they have screwed up and are now telling porkies because they want someone to pay, even if it is not the right person. let them know they have been rumbled (without giving all the details of your next move)

 

they will either have to drop the matter because they know they have been rumbled or waste money on it when they know a decent appeal will beat the claim and cost them more money.

Edited by DragonFly1967
Added spacing/paras

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UPdate from parking eye

 

as probably expected my appeal to them was unsuccessful so I know have my code for popla

 

I wonder if I might ask how I should word the appeal

 

I am the vehicles registered keeper I was not the driver and nor have I named the driver.

 

the event was on the 28th May it was a payment required car park but driver didn't make payment as machine was broken (I am unable to say if other machines exist on site)

 

notification received 7/7/18 on the reverse of the notification is a lie that says they contacted the registered keeper from records held by DVLA and the registered keeper said I was responsible for vehicle(I am the registered keeper)

 

the way I have read the comments above is I need to make the point of the elapsed timescale, the lie on the reverse, the ticket machine not working according to driver, and possible address the comment above about PE being told to not bring any more cases due to byelaws on the port property though not sure if thats relevant to appeal to popla

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What did you put in your appeal to ParkingLie?

 

 

The grounds for your POPLOL appeal are fairly straightforward. The ticket machine (working or not) and everything else is irrelevant. The port (and any part of it) is not "Relevant land" for the purposes of the POFA 2012. And therefore there is no keeper liability.

 

Point them towards previous POPLOL decisions, one posted above, there are others for the same place, to backup your claim.

 

 

Ultimately, it doesn't matter what POPLOL say, it's only binding on ParkingLie. So ParkingLie would have to take you to court to get any money out of you, and if they did that, they will lose!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

in my appeal I stated there would be no admission to who was driving on the date in question. I said the NTK was to late to meet pofa requirements

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should have gone with my suggestion. Then ParkingLie would be in no doubt as to the fact that they're on to a loser.

 

But, no matter. POPLOL it is then. Just make sure that you hammer home the point about there being no keeper liability. Forget dates etc, they aren't important. Just the fact that it is not "Relevant Land" and quote previous POPLOL cases where they have decided on or agreed with this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you must quote the cases and provide a precis of that determination, not just say Bloggs and CEL for example. the parking co will get to see your evidence but you wont get to see theirs so raise the points clearly and even if they dotn allow your appeal you will have it in writing that PE KNOW that they are barking up the wrong tree if they still wish to pursue the matter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
what did you put in your appeal to parkinglie?

 

 

The grounds for your poplol appeal are fairly straightforward. The ticket machine (working or not) and everything else is irrelevant. The port (and any part of it) is not "relevant land" for the purposes of the pofa 2012. And therefore there is no keeper liability.

 

Point them towards previous poplol decisions, one posted above, there are others for the same place, to backup your claim.

 

 

Ultimately, it doesn't matter what poplol say, it's only binding on parkinglie. So parkinglie would have to take you to court to get any money out of you, and if they did that, they will lose!

 

and thank you for your advice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
you must quote the cases and provide a precis of that determination, not just say Bloggs and CEL for example. the parking co will get to see your evidence but you wont get to see theirs so raise the points clearly and even if they dotn allow your appeal you will have it in writing that PE KNOW that they are barking up the wrong tree if they still wish to pursue the matter

 

HOW DO i FIND names of cases? the link just says mr X.. what is a precis please?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Please fill in your quit date here

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.



  • Tweets

  • Our picks

    • A shocking story of domestic and economic abuse compounded by @BarclaysUKHelp ‏ bank complicity – coming soon @A_Gentle_Woman. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/415737-a-shocking-story-of-domestic-and-economic-abuse-compounded-by-barclaysukhelp-%E2%80%8F-bank-complicity-%E2%80%93-coming-soon-a_gentle_woman/
      • 0 replies
    • The FSA has announced large fines against DB UK Bank Limited (trading as DB Mortgages) - DeutscheBank and also against Redstone for their unfair treatment of their customers.
      Please see the links below for summaries and full details from the FSA website.
      It is now completely clear that any arrears charges which exceed actual administrative costs are unfair and therefore unlawful.
      Furthemore, irresponsible lending practices are also unfair and unlawful.
      Additionally there are other unfair practices including unarranged counsellor visits - even if they have been attempted.
      You are entitled to refuse counsellor visits and not incur any charges.
      Any charges for counsellor visits must not seek to make profits. The cost of the visits must be passed on to you at cost price.
      We are hearing stories of people being charged for counsellor visits for which there is no evidence that they were even attempted.
      It is clear that some mortgage lenders are trying to cheat you out of your money.
      You should ascertain how much has been taken from you and claim it back. The chances of winning are better than 90%. It is highly likely that the lender will attempt to avoid court action and offer you back your money.
      However, you should ensure that you receive a proper rate of interest and this means that you should be seeking at least restitutionary damages - which would be much higher than the statutory 8%.
      Furthermore, you should assess whether the paying of demands for unlawful excessive charges has also out you further into arrears and if this has caused you further penalties in terms of extra interest or any other prejudice. This should be claimed as well.
      If excessive unlawful charges have resulted in your credit file being affected, then you should take this into account also when working out exactly what you want by way of remedy from the lender.
      You should consult others on these forums when considering any offer.
      You must not make any complaint through the Ombudsman. your time will be wasted, you will wait up to 2 yrs and there will be a minimal 8% award of interest and no account will be taken of any other damage you have suffered.
      You must make your complaint through the County Court for a rapid and effective remedy.

      http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Library/Communication/PR/2010/120.shtml
      http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/redstone.pdf
      http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/db_uk.pdf
       
      http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/consumerinformation/firmnews/2011/db_mortgages.shtml
      Do you have a mortage arears claim to make? Then post your story on the forum here
      • 0 replies
    • 30 Day Right To Reject - Vehicle Casualty Report. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/415585-30-day-right-to-reject-vehicle-casualty-report/
      • 17 replies
    • I am new here but very glad to find my way here and would welcome any input.
       
      i purchased a brand new campervan conversion from Hillside Leisure (175 miles from our home) on July 26th for £31,000 and, within 48 hours, during a storm, the alarm began to sound incessantly. We could not get it to stop, even after trying everything listed in the manual. We phoned Hillside on Saturday July 28th around 2.00pm. The young man who answered the phone said he would seek the advice of their technician and call us back, which he did. The technician told us that they, Hillside, couldn’t help, but that we should take the van to Nissan (the van is a Nissan) as the fault would lie with one of their components.
       
      • 42 replies
×
×
  • Create New...