Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • at the time, if both owners signed a voluntary charge it can not be a restriction k.  but it looks like one? as above ..... if you re mortgage with the same lender is doesn't need paying if you re mortgage with a new lender then most probably you will have to settle it.
    • The move comes after Tesla reported a sharp fall in its deliveries in the first three months of 2024.View the full article
    • please dont post up unredated court docs!! done now... it looks like: you paid for then cancelled a PC from mac group ltd however the PC still got delivered but not to you. you got issued a court claim but totally ignored it. DCBL HCEO Bailiffs attempted to enforce the CCJ...they failed..you had moved. The Claimant was Granted Permission by the Court to Serve A Statutory Demand and latterly did so. you had attempted to set aside the Original CCJ but failed to attend it's hearing and it got struck out you subsequently have have received a statutory demand for the CCJ sum. you applied to set that aside there was a hearing on 18th Apr which you did not attend. ...............   not quite sure but i think thats the story. ............. same as your other thread.. stop worrying about the house.. you ought to deal with this at some point as if the claimant does go for and manage to you BK. it might not be good. have a think about things , it might pay you to look toward putting an N245 variation to the court and offer a very low £PCM to the court, esp if you have little to no income etc like on benefits/pensioner etc...you might even get it all done for free as there is a small charge for the N245 process.        
    • you've applied to have it set aside and then you've not complied with the Judge's order for your set aside. You'll need to apply to have that order stayed on the ground you were a LIP and didn't understand it. Make it clear you now understand it and you ask that an order be made in the interim to stop all enforcement and any other action.
    • I will provide an update once I receive any further letters regarding application for SJ, and will post up any redacted version.
  • 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 
        • 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

Parking Eye ANPR PCN Claimform - Barnet hospital EN5 3DJ

Recommended Posts


I am writing with a request for urgent help.

My partner received a private parking ticket for overstaying his time in a hospital carpark when his elderly mother attended A&E.

He was not able to get to the car park to increase the time.

He did not respond to the initial letters as per the usual guidance.

Unfortunately, he did not see the Letter Before County Claim (dated 19/9/23) as he has a busy job and was on holiday for a period during this time.

He just received a county court claim dated 30/10/23.

I am not sure what the options are now.

I can post further details later/tomorrow but wanted to post this as soon as I could.

Many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks so much. First link completed below

Which Court have you received the claim from ? Civil National Business Centre Northampton N1 

Name of the Claimant :   Parking Eye Ltd        

Claimants Solicitors: Jayne Leonard (Legal Representative)

Date of issue – 30 Oct 2023

Date for AOS - 17 Nov 2023

Date to submit Defence - 1 Dec 2023

What is the claim for  

1. Claim for monies outstanding from the Defendant in relation to a Parking Charge (Ref xxxxx) issued on xxxx.

2. The signage clearly displayed throughout Barnet Hospital (Patient & Visitors A), Wellhouse Lane, Barnett [sic], Hertfordshire, EN5 3DJ states that this is private land, managed by Parking Eye Ltd, and that it is subject to terms and conditions, including the payment of parking tariffs, by which those who park agree to be bound (the contract).

3. Parking Eye's ANPR system captured vehicle XXXXXXX entering and leaving the site on DATE, and parking without a valid paid parking ticket.

4. Pursuant to Sch 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, notice has been given to the registered keeper, making them liable for the Parking Charge payable upon breach.

What is the value of the claim?

Amount Claimed £120

court fees £35

legal rep fees £50

Total Amount £205

Have you moved since the issuance of the PCN? No

Did you receive a letter of Claim With A reply Pack wanting I&E etc about 1mth before the claimform?  LBC dated 19/9/23 - not sure date received as only found it with other unopened mail after receiving court claim, therefore did not reply

2023-11-03 16-41.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • honeybee13 changed the title to County Court Claim Parking Eye - Barnet hospital EN5 3DJ

For PCN's received through the post [ANPR camera capture]

(must be received within 14 days from the Incident)

Please answer the following questions.

1 Date of the infringement 26/7/2023

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] Keeper received initial parking charge notice dated 1/8/23, a reminder dated 10/8/23 and another letter dated 4/9/23. None of these are headed Notice to Keeper. See all 3 attached redacted letters.

3 Date received 4/9/23 (as above not headed NTK)

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? Yes if the last letter is actually an NTK

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes but the picture of the depart time does not clearly show the number plate, although it is enlarged as showing below the photo

6 Have you appealed? No

Have you had a response? n/a

7 Who is the parking company? Parking Eye Ltd

8. Where exactly Barnet Hospital Patient and Visitors A, Hertfordshire

For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. POPLA (BPA)

If you have received any other correspondence, please mention it here LBC - attached in next post as couldn't fit both attachments




Barnet parking initial letters.pdf

Letter before CC claim


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Parking Eye ANPR PCN Claimform - Barnet hospital EN5 3DJ

Thank you.

Re post #7 - a question: my partner has a govt gateway login for tax. Can this be used or does he need a new one for this?

re post 8 He didn’t ignore it but the LBC letter wasn’t opened, in error. It was in a pile of other post  and wasn’t noticed.   I searched through the post when he received the court claim


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you so much.

I am having computer problems but should be able to follow all the advice above with the MCOL when this is resolved tomorrow.

Two further questions

- none of the letters are headed notice to keeper and both the reminder letter are dated more then 14 days after the ‘offence’. Is this another example of lack of compliance or have I misunderstood something here? Does the NTK no longer have to headed this as previously it did?

I agree with post 10 that not opening the letter is the same as ignoring it but was trying to explain how that came about - it was a terrible error on his part.


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have run in to a problem with the government gateway as the account list my partner's business address (which he no longer uses) rather than his home address which is on the claim form. I have sent a message on government gateway requesting how to do this. Once I get a reply I will be able to complete the AOS

Link to post
Share on other sites

One other thing from post #11 the PCN and PCN reminders do say "time in car park" 1 hour 46 mins - does that not count as stating a parking period or does that have to be in the NTK?

The CPR letter is prepared & ready to go when the AOS is sorted. I think we may need to get a new GG account for the MCOL if we can't get an answer from the MCOL helpline

Do you think we have a reasonable chance of defending this given the failure to respond to the LBA?

Link to post
Share on other sites


AOS now done online. There may be a slight issue receiving correspondence as, although I was assured by the 'helpl'ine that the address the court will use will be the one they sent the original claim to,  the acknowledgement of the AOS has the old business address on as the correspondence address. I tried to get hold of the court on the phone without success. Am also trying to get the address updated via email but none of the people involved seem to understand the issue or their own systems! We usually get correspondence from that address forwarded anyway so hopefully should be ok

Have also now posted the CPR request first class and have proof of posting.

Thanks again all

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The hospital is not that close but we should be able to get some photos over the next couple of weeks. I will try to see if any of the issues below are addressed on the signs.

The plot thickens as I have just checked the credit card statement which says £2.20 was paid on that date to paybyphone.

I have just checked the hospital website re parking charges and it says 0-1 hour is £2 and 1-3 hours is £3. I am a bit confused at the £2.20 but maybe they charge extra for using PaybyPhone?

The website also says they have changed the system to allow payment for extra time after the event. However, I don't know when this option became available - certainly the driver was not aware of this. Not sure if one is expected to check the website for this info but I suspect not. I will see if the signs mention it.

There was an expectation that the patient (86 year old) who had been in A&E for some time, was due to be discharged imminently after seeing a doctor. There were unexpected delays and the car park was some distance away from the A&E department. The driver did not want to return to the car and leave the patient alone and miss seeing the doctor. It was all very late at night - as can be seen from the PCN, departure from the carpark was 00:16. At this point the focus was on getting the patient home rather than thinking about the car park charges. The car park was very poorly lit.

I will post photos as soon as I am able to get them. 




Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks both.

I will send the email from my email address so the PE don't get one for my partner. We have different surnames so that should hopefully help with anonymity. Should I mention that it is at the court stage? If so I will explain that the LBA was overlooked


I am writing because we have received a parking charge notice from Parking Eye. My partner's vulnerable, 86 year old mother was admitted to A&E on 25/7/23. As a busy medical professional himself, my partner only managed to get to A&E at 22:30 that night, with a plan to have a quick discussion about mother's care with one of the doctors, and take her home. Another family member had been with her until that time. My partner bought a parking ticket for one hour which was believed to be sufficient. Unfortunately, by the time my partner returned to the car, driven it from the parking bay which was some way away from the A&E exit, collected mother from A&E and helped her to the car, my partner didn't leave the carpark until 00:16. It was late, the car park was dark and my partner wanted to get mother home and settled, before driving home and getting up early for work. The parking situation didn't seem a priority at the time.

In these circumstances I am writing to request that you cancel the parking fine. The government guidance recommends a pay on exit scheme which would be much fairer for all concerned - see quote from the website below:

Trusts should consider installing ‘pay on exit’ or similar schemes so that drivers pay only for the time that they have used. Additional charges should only be imposed where reasonable [footnote 3] and should be waived when overstaying is beyond the driver’s control (such as when treatment takes longer than planned, or when staff are required to work beyond their scheduled shift).

I think you can agree that, given a ticket was purchased, there was no intention not to pay for the parking, despite the delay this caused in actually getting in to the hospital.

Many thanks for your assistance

Yours etc


Link to post
Share on other sites

My partner Perhaps I should say my partner was attending the hospital etc and now the registered keeper has received the ticket etc?

Edited by ajjm
Link to post
Share on other sites


I have sent off the email to PALS with the recommended changes and attached a copy of the ticket and proof of the payment for the car park. Will update when I get a reply or any other communication about this matter.

Thanks all

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...


We have now received a pack of documents from Parking Eye.

They state they contain a copy of the contract between PE and the hospital trust but as they are commercially sensitive and not largely relevant to the claim the doc is redacted.

I attach a copy of their cover letter, dated 27/11/23, which states that the signs in the car park are sufficient so that "even if their presence was a purported planning breach" they would lead a motorist to conclude that parking was subject to certain conditions.

In the pack are 39 pages of a service agreement dated 2013 and signed in 2014 and a further 10 pages dated 6/8/21 and signed 16/8/21 headed "Amendment No 7 Services Agreement".

There have also enclosed copies of the various letters they sent to the registered keeper.

I have not received any reply to the email I sent to the Royal Free trust parking people and have just resent it.



Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. I am not sure what the next steps are or how I check PP requirements in relation to regulatory requirements mentioned in 14.10  as asked in post 44

I have looked at Cardiff Devil's thread - I can't see any reference to a grace period in the info I have been sent. Having said that the driver did pay for a ticket, it just didn't end up covering the entire period the car was in the carpark so I guess any grace period is irrelevant.

Given the huge amount of redacted info should I approach the hospital to try get a copy of the contract? Still no response from them about cancelling the ticket - although I note that the contract at 11.3 states that after a cancellation after court proceedings issued can only be done by PE

I'm hopeful that post no 11 in this thread that states the PCN doesn't comply with PoFA and the failure to mention a parking period will be sufficient to scupper this claim? Do others agree?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh gosh this has been overlooked.

I was awaiting all the paperwork from PE which didn't come till 6/12.

The letter in the pack is dated 27/11 but sent to my partner's business address and then forwarded.

I did think this had been changed on government gateway but after being told it had been, I then understood it hadn't been possible. Having said that, the staff there always post things promptly so I doubt it arrived there by 1/12.

Is it too late too file a defence? Are we not entitled to get their documents before filing it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry not sure how to screenshot but this is a copy of the contents

Please note that a defended claim will be transferred to an appropriate county court to proceed.

Each step is completed by clicking 'Next' at the bottom of the page, which automatically confirms and saves the information you have entered. Any error messages displayed at the top of a page must be corrected before moving on to the next step.

Before you can file a defence to the claim against you, you must make sure the following apply in your case:

you are filing your defence within 14 days of service of the claim on you (a claim is considered served on the fifth day after it is issued)


where separate detailed particulars of claim were served, within 14 days of service of those


if you filed an acknowledgement of service, within 28 days of service of the claim (or separate particulars)

You don't have to pay a fee to defend a claim. However, you will have to pay a fee if you decide to make a counterclaim against the claimant. If you file a defence electronically through MCOL, do not send a copy by post.

If you experience any difficulties, contact the help desk:

Email: [email protected]

Telephone: 0300 123 1057



Do PEs documents count as separate detailed particulars of claim?

It does seem possible to be able to go on to the next page to fill in the defence so presumably if the system works, it's not too late?

Not sure what we should be putting in the defence tho!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. Here is what I propose to submit

The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and 
generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4.  The 
Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 
16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a 
specific response has not been made.

1.It is denied that the defendant breached any terms and conditions set on private land.

2.It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of xxxxx

3. It is denied that the Claimant entered into a contract with the Defendant, or broke any such contract.

4.  The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer.

5.  The Claimant is claiming legal representation fees when they are in fact representing themselves.

6.The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Hence it is denied that the defendant has any debt to settle with the claimant.

7. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner.

Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. The proper Claimant is the landowner.

I cannot find the POC - where amongst all the paperwork should this be - so haven't personalised the above. Obvs will put in the reg no of the car. 
Is this sufficient or too templatey
Is it too early to put in anything re parking period (as opposed to payment period) and lack of compliance of PCN as per post 11?
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just received this from the hospital trust parking team:


Many thanks for your email and for explaining the circumstances at the time and please accept our sincere apologies for the delay in responding.

 It does appear that the parking charge dates back to the 26 July, so I have needed to contact Parkingeye as I am not sure at what stage the charge is now at.  If the case has escalated to legal proceedings, I would be unable to cancel the charge at this stage.

The charge was issued as it does appear to have been issued for insufficient payment.  As the car parks at the Barnet hospital site are controlled by ANPR cameras, payment for parking is upon exit only as the machines calculate the payment required to cover the parking.

Once I have received Parkingeyes response, I will contact you as to whether it was possible to cancel or reduce.

I have responded:

Dear Dee,

Thank you so much for your response.
The payment was not on exit (had it been so, it would have been possible to pay the correct amount rather than guess). The payment machine was used for the time believed to be appropriate. 
I am very grateful that you will try to cancel this charge, if you possibly can. I do hope that Parking Eye will take your request for that seriously and the attempt to pay the correct amount in good faith. 
I do hope it can be arranged for payment on exit from this carpark in future, as this situation is very stressful. 
Many thanks for your help
Definitely worth knowing for future reference that appealing to the relevant hospital trust department is worthwhile (even if they don't know how each car park operates in their trust).
Clearly, as already advised on here in post #21, PE won't cancel as at court stage but hopefully good for the defence that the hospital would consider cancelling or reducing the charge. 

Hmm had a response from the parking dept - below with my response. The plot thickens....


I can confirm that parking at all our sites is set up as pay on exit as the machines calculate the amount owed as with all ANPR camera car parks. 

When drivers approach the machines, the machine will try and calculate the parking time up until that point as it will work on the basis that payment is being made. 

For example, if drivers approach the machines when they arrive, the machine may correctly inform them there that’s nothing owing, as they have not parked long enough for charging to commence.  

It’s just a machine and its only programmed to calculate parking.  

There are signs that do advise drivers that parking is on exit.

 As soon as I hear back from Parkingeye, I will contact you again with their response.

My reply:

 Hi Dee

I must say that is very confusing! I am not sure how one would pay the wrong amount if payment was on exit.
The driver remembers paying at a machine by credit card - hence the proof of payment on the cc statement.
Is it possible that the payment system has recently been changed at Barnet?
If the driver is incorrect then are you suggesting that the machine may be incorrectly programmed and the source of the problem?
Thanks again for responding. 
Link to post
Share on other sites


1. Received an acknowledgement of our defence from the HM Courts and Tribunal service dated 13/12/23 and saying PE have been served with a copy and have 28 days to deceide whether to proceed.

2. Received a follow up from hospital parking team with cheeky response from PE:

Parkingeye have now feed back to me and have confirmed that payment was made on arrival and the driver only paid for 1 hour, but stayed longer.  For this reason, the parking charge notice was generated by the ANPR camera system for insufficient payment.

Parkingeye have also advised that the “PCN has gone to default so at this stage there is nothing we can do as the court have ruled in our favour”.  Unfortunately, if this matter has gone to court, we would be unable to take any further action.

3. Have responded to the hospital parking team:

Thank you for following this up. 

The court have not ruled in favour of PE - this is a misleading account of the situation from them to you. PE have made a county court claim which I plan to defend. PE will know this as they will have received my defence and have the option of not proceeding with the claim. I hope that your potential wish to cancel this charge will assist them in coming to such a resolution. 
Your latest email does confirm to me that that payment at this car park had to be made on arrival and there was no option to pay on exit, as is recommended by the government guidance. I would be grateful for your continued support with this. 
Best wishes,
Edited by ajjm
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...