Backdoor CCJ - Parking Eye/CPP PAPLOC - PCN sent to V5C Scottish address - Court papers served to ex's address england!!

[Nicky Boy]

Well redacted bank statement, just showing her name/address?

[FTMDave]

Good idea NB.

It's unlikely there is a second CCJ as court papers would have turned up either in Scotland or at the ex's, and you say the ex hasn't received anything else.

Anyone, the snotty e-mail should put a stop to their shenanigans with the second PCN for the moment.

[dx100uk]

wrong thread ignore

[tutty1]

Hi All,

This just gets better - despite making reference to the PCN's & Court Claim No. I have received this reply today for the SAR.

Thank you for your correspondence. This has been passed to us as you have raised a data query.

 

We are unable to locate any Parking Charges using the name or address details provided. We would therefore kindly request that you provide the Parking Charge reference and relevant vehicle registration.

If your request solely pertains to vehicle data, we will require evidence of your continued status as registered keeper. Thus, we would require further identification documents.

Please provide the following:

•    Your full name

•    Your full current address shown on your log book (V5C)

•    A copy of your log book (V5C) for proof of continued status as Registered Keeper

For further information about your rights as a data subject, plus information about the categories of data we process, data transfers, the legal basis for our processing, and the purposes of processing, please visit: https://www.parkingeye.co.uk/privacy-policy/

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Parkingeye Privacy Team

[FTMDave]

Well that shows they have received the mails, so can't pretend they haven't.

Reply to them with both PCN numbers, and also the vehicle registration.

[tutty1]

Hi All,

 

Received this today...............they're not budging!

I've now got pics of the car park and the machine you have to pay at when you leave.

Problem being now is that it has to be paid / set aside before they have to produce the SAR - would it be worth asking them for a copy of the original PCN they (supposedly) sent to the address in Scotland so we at least know what the charge is for as the court papers don't even say what it is.

Weird as we have 5 pieces of correspondence for the 8 minute one on the 11th Sept but nothing for this one except for LOC @ English address.

Thank you for your correspondence received in relation to the above referenced Parking Charge, which was issued following a parking event that took place on 22/08/2023 at Mary Street, Carlisle car park.

It is clearly stated on our signs that failure to adhere to parking regulations will result in enforcement action being taken and vehicle keeper details being requested from the DVLA to enable this. The DVLA release the name and address details of a vehicle keeper to registered companies, such as ParkingEye, if ‘reasonable cause’ can be demonstrated; i.e. a breach of parking regulations.

In this instance, 3 letters were issued to the address provided by the DVLA but unfortunately, ParkingEye received no response. Our original notices outlined the appeals procedure offered by ParkingEye and provided a period of 28 days from the date of our initial correspondence to send any documentation you believe would aid an appeal to us directly. ParkingEye run a dedicated appeals team who consider each appeal on a case by case basis but we note that in this instance, no such appeal was lodged.

As no response was received to the letters issued, we also contacted you further at an alternative address provided to ParkingEye by a Credit Reference Agency. We also attached a copy of the original Parking Charge Notice to this letter and reiterated the opportunity to appeal. Again, we received no response to this correspondence.

ParkingEye thereafter issued a county court claim on 08/01/2024 to recover the outstanding amount. However, as no defence was filed, nor was full payment received within the applicable time frame, the court granted a default judgment in ParkingEye’s favour. At this late stage, ParkingEye would be unable to accept an appeal and we require payment of the full outstanding amount. 

We can confirm that £227 remains outstanding. Please find our payment information below.

If you wish to apply to have the judgment set aside then you can do so by filing an N244 form. Please note that such an application will require the payment of a court fee of £275 (payable to the court) and that there is no guarantee that the judgment will be set aside. This will also involve a hearing in front of a Judge.

In certain circumstances, individuals may not have to pay a fee. A system known as the remission system is available to those who would have difficulty paying a fee and meet the appropriate criteria. It is for you to make the appropriate enquires about this system and details can be found at: https://www.gov.uk/get-help-with-court-fees

Please note ParkingEye dispute any costs you claim to have incurred and will oppose any application or claim that you may wish to pursue in relation to any such costs.

Payment can be made by telephoning our offices on 0330 555 4444, by visiting www.parkingeye.co.uk, or by posting a cheque/postal order to the below address. Please note that you must quote the above Parking Charge reference on the reverse of the cheque or postal order.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Parkingeye Enforcement Team

[FTMDave]

Well, it was always a long shot to get them to budge.

Your daughter now has three choices, all of them unpalatable.

1.  Pay the £300-ish.  The matter goes away.

2.  Defy the court and not pay.  I've been on the forum for eight years and I've never seen a PPC enforce a CCJ for a single ticket, it's not worth their while.  However, she would have a CCJ and her credit file would be knackered for six years.

3.  Pay £275 and apply for set aside.

We see set aside applications here all the time.  People move, they don't update the vehicle log book with the DVLA, court papers go to the wrong address.  They find out months or years later that they have a CCJ and have to pay £275 for a set aside hearing. In those eight years I've only seen two properly-argued set aside applications be refused.  Her chances of getting a set aside are about 95%.

But what of the £275?  In all the cases I've mentioned the motorist has to pay as it is their fault for not contacting the DVLA.  Would the judge make your daughter or PE pay the £275?  TBH I haven't a clue.  It would be a coin toss.

[jk2054]

You’ll get your £275 back if you win the final hearing afaik

Also who are PE’s sols in this? DCBL?

Edited February 21 by jk2054

[tutty1]

Hi,

Never received a solicitors letter - just a LOC that says Car Parking Partnership Legal Dept (Yours faithfully then a squiggle J M L________| )then on court papers it says Jayne Leonard (Claimants Legal Representative) which I'm assuming is the squiggle.

She is on LinkedIn smiling away............https://www.linkedin.com/in/jayne-leonard-346672129/?originalSubdomain=uk

She is very apprehensive of taking it further...........doesn't have the £227 to pay fine never mind £275 - with just having the baby, she's very emotional at the moment.

Thinking that I may as well just pay it for her and hope ParkingEye aren't in the process of doing all this again for the one dated 11th Sept.

She can't even remember this one and never receiving any paperwork makes it even more frustrating.

T.

[dx100uk]

CPP can issue the letter of claim, so you did have one.

it is NOT A FINE.

dx

 

[tutty1]

Hi,

Yes DX - the LOC and court papers where sent to the English address (Ex-boyfriends) which we obtained after the default in court

- previously had never received anything for this claim at her registered Scottish address............all too late now it feels.

Have only ever received a PCN at the Scottish address for the 8 minute one on 11th Sept but also have a LOC for that one sent to the English address - that's why worried they will raise another.

[FTMDave]

4 hours ago, tutty1 said:

hope ParkingEye aren't in the process of doing all this again for the one dated 11th Sept.

PE won't be able to pull the same backdoor CCJ trick as she's warned them in the snotty letter about the address issue.

Just to be absolutely sure though it'd be best if the ex opened any correspondence for her.

 

[lookinforinfo]

I would have thought that the Courts would take into consideration her financial situation especially as this isn't a question of not not filing a change of address but a breach of her GDPR and waive the Court fee. Can't hurt to ask and PE have provided the website to ask.

I have to say that I am surprised by PE's attitude since it is their mistake sending the papers to England  when tha address there has never been her address.

[tutty1]

Hi All,

Firstly, many thanks to all that have contributed with advice on this thread - much appreciated.

Daughter phoned the court and they said they cannot waive the £275 fee. Also said that if she did set aside it would be heard in an English Court as papers served to an English address even though it is an incorrect address............is this correct?

Makes me feel like less likely to win?

Received the SAR back from PE and they have stated they received the English address from Experian.

We've looked on her credit report and there is a linked address there from a company called Lendable that did 3 searches on her.......... one on her Scottish address, 1 on our neighbours address? and one on the English address. She says she and her ex went to look at buying a car - he cannot drive but was going to get the finance. I can only assume they have done a search on his address? Anyway it got refused unsurprisingly. There are no other links to that address on the credit report and no other searches from outside companies so how did PE obtain this address without a search on her credit report?

It should be said copies of all pcn's where included so now we have copies of the original ones that were never received for some unkown reason - exactly the same as 8 mins one (but this one for 21mins over an hour) - stating keeper liability and all addressed to Scottish address.

Now on to another matter............yesterday she informed me she has another pcn from a different company and now received a 'legal' letter. I've attached the 3 bits of info she has given me. I'm just worried these may try the same trick, so is it worth actually contacting them before it escalates further and state the no keeper liability in Scotland defence as they are claiming it as keeper liability -  and that she doesn't recognize the offence?

Would you believe she actually got this pcn when they went to look at buying a car as mentioned above...............just incredible!

Thanks.

T.

 

PCNG24.pdf

Edited February 27 by Nicky Boy
Extra redaction on PDF

[Nicky Boy]

Hi Tutty,

You'd left her name showing on the trace letter.

Now redacted and re-uploaded.

[FTMDave]

Regarding the CCJ first. 

In post 32 I outlined her unpalatable choices.  I see she's looked into a set aside application.  Unfortunately the court is right to insist on the £275 payment (unless she qualifies for help with fees) and also on the matter going to a court in England as the original address was in England.  Presumably they would allow her a court in the very north of England and she could push for an on-line hearing instead.

Appling for a CCJ is easy (a single page of A4 plus a couple of attachments) as is the hearing (15 minutes usually).  So far so good.

The problems are two.  One, the judge will want to know (1) why she didn't defend when the claim form arrived (easy to do) and (2) how she would defend the case at a hearing if a rematch was fixed.  Can she do the latter?  It only has to be an outline but it is a fundamental part of set aside.

Two, the court will want £275 for the hearing, no way out of that, and will either ignore the matter of costs so she will have to pay, or else be convinced that all this is PE's fault and order PE to pay.  We simply don't know.  She could be chucking £275 away.

[tutty1]

Yes, Kingstown Retail Park.

With regards to the ParkingEye Court Default - think she is just wanting to pay it and get it over and done with.

Before paying though, as she still has a few days - Do you think it is worth contacting PE and asking for an assurance they will not pursue the 8 mins one any further if she pays the £227 for this one?

Thanks.

T.

[FTMDave]

Can you please upload everything PE sent in the SAR?

She needs to put the boot into Experian too.

17 minutes ago, tutty1 said:

Before paying though, as she still has a few days - Do you think it is worth contacting PE and asking for an assurance they will not pursue the 8 mins one any further if she pays the £227 for this one?

You can try, but I'm 99.99999999999999999999% sure they will say no.  They're just interested in £££££.  They refused the set aside although they were blatantly in the wrong.

 

[tutty1]

This is the covering email response (all personal details removed) - the pdf with all the info is 8mb - too big to upload - I'll need to split it and redact it tomorrow.

Dear,

We write further to your recent correspondence. We note from this that you have submitted a Request for Access pursuant to Article 15 of the UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR).

We wish to confirm that the response provided below, and via the enclosed documents, concerns the Parking Charge referenced above. This data is provided on the basis that we note that you have already been identified as the registered keeper of the vehicle in question in relation to the dates of 22^nd August 2023 and 11^th September 2023 and therefore we can be satisfied, to the standard required, that the data collected and processed in respect of that vehicle on that date is personal data pertaining to you.

We can confirm that your name and address were provided by the DVLA on 26^th August 2023. This data was provided as you were identified as the registered keeper of vehicle in respect of a breach of the parking terms and conditions that took place within Mary Street, Carlisle on 22^nd August 2023

Parkingeye can confirm that we issued a total of 5 items of correspondence to yourself to date prior to any further recovery or legal action. The address used was the address as held by the DVLA for the Registered Keeper of the vehicle.

As no response was received to any of the correspondence sent, Parkingeye contacted a tracing agent to obtain any potential alternative address. To which end, an alternative address for yourself was provided and further items of correspondence were sent. Please note, whilst Experian are a credit referencing agency, no credit check has been undertaken in relation to this Parking Charge. We only utilise their tracing service in order to obtain alternative contact details. For clarity, personal data sent to our tracing agent is done so via an encrypted transmission route, therefore we do not hold physical copies of the same. The categories of personal data we send to them is your name, address and vehicle details.

As Parkingeye did not receive any response to the correspondence sent, we entered into legal proceedings on 8^th January 2024 in order to recover the outstanding sum owed for the Parking Charge and further costs were incurred.

We can confirm that your name and address were provided by the DVLA on 15^th September 2023. This data was provided as you were identified as the registered keeper of vehicle in respect of a breach of the parking terms and conditions that took place within Mary Street, Carlisle on 11^th September 2023 .

Parkingeye can confirm that we issued a total of 5 items of correspondence to yourself to date prior to any further recovery or legal action. The address used was the address as held by the DVLA for the Registered Keeper of the vehicle.

As no response was received to any of the correspondence sent, Parkingeye contacted a tracing agent to obtain any potential alternative address. To which end, an alternative address for yourself was provided and further items of correspondence were sent. Please note, whilst Experian are a credit referencing agency, no credit check has been undertaken in relation to this Parking Charge. We only utilise their tracing service in order to obtain alternative contact details. For clarity, personal data sent to our tracing agent is done so via an encrypted transmission route, therefore we do not hold physical copies of the same. The categories of personal data we send to them is your name, address and vehicle details.

As Parkingeye did not receive any response to the correspondence sent, we contacted our recovery agent in order to recover the outstanding sum owed against the Parking Charge. For clarity, personal data sent to our recovery agent is done so via an encrypted transmission route, therefore we do not hold physical copies of the same. The categories of personal data we send to them is your name, address and vehicle details.

We can confirm, in line with s.(1)(h) of Article 15, that no automated decision-making or profiling, referred to in Article 22(1) and (4), has been undertaken in relation to personal data in this case. We note that Article 22 states as follows, “The data subject shall have the right not to be subject to a decision based solely on automated processing, including profiling, which produces legal effects concerning him or her or similarly significantly affects him or her”. We can confirm that you have not been subject to such a decision and that the processing falls outside the scope of Article 22.

Any automated checks undertaken by Parkingeye in relation to ANPR data will only result in a decision not to issue a Parking Charge. Should the ANPR data we process indicate that a breach of the parking terms and conditions has taken place, any subsequent decision to issue a Parking Charge will require that data to pass through a substantial checking process that includes human intervention.

Please note that the UK General Data Protection Regulation provides the following further rights:

 

•             The right to request from Parkingeye access, rectification or erasure of your personal data;

•             The right to request from Parkingeye restriction of processing of your personal data;

•             The right to object to the processing of your personal data.

 

Please note that some of these rights are not absolute and will only apply in certain circumstances. We will review each request we receive in respect of these rights. We do not have to agree with a request but if we refuse, we will still contact the data subject within one month to explain why. You also have the right to lodge a complaint with the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). For further information, please refer to the ICO website, www.ico.org.uk. You may also seek a judicial remedy.

For further information about your rights as a data subject, plus information about the categories of data we process, data transfers, the legal basis for our processing, and the purposes of processing, please visit: https://www.Parkingeye.co.uk/privacy-policy/

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Parkingeye Privacy Team

[FTMDave]

Thanks.

I often use this free site  https://www.sejda.com/compress-pdf  for work to compress PDFs.

If it's no good, as you say, split it, and we'll do the biz at this end tomorrow.

Knackered here - more in the morrow.

[tutty1]

Hi,

Hopefully there now - hopefully everything redacted - mine are in red - anything in black is redacted by PE.

I think she may have been confused as how to pay because at the very end of the last pdf it actually says 1hr paid for meaning she was over by 1min

- I think she thought you paid before leaving when I'm not sure that is the case - I'm going to Carlisle on Thursday so going to visit the car park in question myself.

Also, strangely it says on that one 10mins free but on the other one it says 0min free - for the same car park within a few days?

what she was saying about the 10mins free seems to be correct to some degree.

Just to add - daughter had already taken some photos.

It clearly shows pay on exit , how do you get a pcn when the machine says how much it is?

Even PE's docs say she paid but no idea how it can be 1hr 11mins.

Really confused tbh.

Thanks.

PE SAR.pdf

Just to add - daughter had already taken some photos.

It clearly shows pay on exit , how do you get a pcn when the machine says how much it is?

Even PE's docs say she paid but no idea how it can be 1hr 11mins.

Really confused tbh.

T.

 

signs.pdf

[FTMDave]

Thanks.

The most urgent stuff first.  You've sorted out the address issue with PE for the 8-minute one so there is no chance of a  backdoor CCJ.

Presumably you've done similar with G24.

So you're confused?  Well so am I!  That's the point.  PE can't make enough money from the small number of genuinely abusive drivers so they spend their time making up absurd rules with Alice in Wonderland logic so you & I get confused and break their stupid made-up regulations.

Your daughter will know but it's likely the pay-on-exit machine gives you no information and you have to guess how long you were there - with PE hoping you guess wrong.

The free ten minutes might be in one because she paid and so it was  a grace period but not in the other as she didn't pay - but who knows.

[tutty1]

Hi,

She said the machine actually tells you how much you have to pay and you pay on your card. I've actually emailed evology who make the machine to ask for an explanation as to how this can happen - in essence it is 1min over!

With regards to the 8 mins one, she is adamant the the machine said no charge when she left - her ex-boyfriend was with her in the car and he confirmed this so god knows what is going on.

Worth chancing the set aside?

With regards to G24, not done anything yet - not sure I want to alert them to the other address - should I just write and confirm the Scottish address with no reference to anything else?

Thanks for your time FTMDave.

T.

[FTMDave]

The problem isn't the dodginess of it all or even getting the set aside where she would have a 95% chance IMO.

The problem is that it would cost her £275 that she might never get back to fight £227.

You'll have worked out how much we despise these companies and don't want to give them a penny, but it may be better to pay the £227 and the matter goes away.  And to learn for the future.

She does have a third choice, which is simply to defy the court and not pay.  PE wouldn't involve bailiffs for such a small sum, I've never seen it in eight years here.  But she would be punished by the court with a CCJ and thus a knackered credit file for six years.

She needs to decide soon though - the 6 March deadline is looming.

Regarding G24, I think you need to get the letters off.  There is no imminent threat of court.  But the problem is down the line.  These companies have six years to bring a claim, and yes, they do resurrect claims just before the six-year cut-off so they can add mountains of interest.  What will be the situation say in three years' time?  Will she still be on good terms with the ex?  Will the ex still be in the same place?  What if a claim form arrives there and the ex has moved?  I think you need to hammer into G24 and BW Legal's skulls right from the start, and to have it in writing, that they are not to write to any other addressees except the Scottish one.

Plus write to the retail park - that might solve all her G24 woes.

[FTMDave]

Well, the deadline to pay is 6 March.

She needs to make a decision.