PARKING EYE ....Need new help!!

[labman]

Re: PARKING EYE ....Need new help!!

There is also a possibility that the demand could amount to Fraud by False Misrepresentation (Section 2, Fraud Act 2006) or, if any threats are made, Blackmail (Section 21, Theft Act 1968). I suspect a lot of landowners and their muppet parking contractors know this, at the back of their tiny minds, but prefer to delude themselves they are doing no wrong. Pity some of them have to find out the hard way, like Parking Eye, OPC and VCS have.

BB, please don't get me wrong, it is lovely to see you back to rude health and contributing fully to the life of LB again. I do wish you would not make comments like those quoted above though, as there is not a cat in hells chance of any of these charges ever being brought against these organisations. Giving people a glimmer of hope they may be is almost more misrepresentation than the very Act to which you refer.

For anyone thinking I'm nasty, and this poor bloke's only just come back after a very serious period of illness, I would like to point out that BB and I do actually have huge mutual respect for each other.

[CleverClogs]

Re: PARKING EYE ....Need new help!!

No it wouldn't affect a CRB check, as it would be a civil offence, not criminal.

I believe that you are quite wrong...

It is not an offence at all !

[CleverClogs]

Re: PARKING EYE ....Need new help!!

Good morning xxxxxxx
I was sorry to learn that you had received a Parking Charge Notice whilst parking at our Queensbury store. Perhaps I might explain the reason why our Queensbury store has parking restrictions. It is to ensure there is sufficient parking space available for our customers, and to deter people using the car park whilst attending to their other business elsewhere. I hope I have been able to explain why these car parking arrangements are necessary and that you will appreciate why, in the interest of fairness, there cannot be any exceptions to these arrangements. We regret that we are unable to accede to your request to waiver the parking charge on this occasion.Thank you for contacting Morrisons. Kind regards
Danielle WM Morrisons Supermarkets PLC

I would reply to dopey Danielle, thanking her for her letter and telling her that her intransigent (and semi-literate) reply WILL be published as an example of how her employer treats its customers. Some of those customers may then decide to shop elsewhere, at stores where customers are not considered to be "a regrettable but perhaps necessary nuisance".

[CleverClogs]

Re: PARKING EYE ....Need new help!!

I do wish you would not make comments like those quoted above though, as there is not a cat in hells chance of any of these charges ever being brought against these organisations.

Indeed, but would you not tend to agree that his analysis of the law was essentially accurate?

[ParkingMine]

Re: PARKING EYE ....Need new help!!

Well..., surprise surprise….

PE totally ignored my request to provide me with POPLA appeal code!
And this is what they wrote!

Dear Sir / Madam

Thank you for your correspondence in relation to the Parking Charge incurred on 17 January 2012 at 15.13, a Morrisons Queensbury car Park.

You have provided evidence of purchase. However, please be advised that this did not meet the discretionary criteria set by the landowner in this case.

In order for ParkingEye to cancel this Parking Charge, we will need valid evidence indicating that you did not break the terms and conditions stipulated on the signage.

This Parking Charge has been placed on hold for 14 days in order for you to provide additional/further evidence.

Alternatively, payment can be made by telephoning our offices on 0844 247 2982 or by visiting www.parkingeye.co.uk or by posting a cheque or postal order to the address detailed below.

If this charge has been paid and you choose to provide further evidence relating to your appeal, please forward this to us for consideration.

Yours faithfully

ParkingEye Team

[bluebottle]

Re: PARKING EYE ....Need new help!!

BB, please don't get me wrong, it is lovely to see you back to rude health and contributing fully to the life of LB again. I do wish you would not make comments like those quoted above though, as there is not a cat in hells chance of any of these charges ever being brought against these organisations. Giving people a glimmer of hope they may be is almost more misrepresentation than the very Act to which you refer.

For anyone thinking I'm nasty, and this poor bloke's only just come back after a very serious period of illness, I would like to point out that BB and I do actually have huge mutual respect for each other.

I agree with you that is unlikely the CPS would run with Fraud and Blackmail charges against PE in a single case, Labman, as they would be overrun with lots of similar cases. However, pointing out what the law says on the matter of dishonesty and making unwarranted threats to extort money out of people does illustrate just what low-life PPCs are. If you are going to do someone or a company for fraud, you need to make it worthwhile. It wouldn't do any harm to let Trading Standards know about PPCs' activities as they have a healthy dislike of the so-and-sos as much as we do.

[bluebottle]

Re: PARKING EYE ....Need new help!!

Well..., surprise surprise….

PE totally ignored my request to provide me with POPLA appeal code!
And this is what they wrote!

Dear Sir / Madam

Thank you for your correspondence in relation to the Parking Charge incurred on 17 January 2012 at 15.13, a Morrisons Queensbury car Park.

You have provided evidence of purchase. However, please be advised that this did not meet the discretionary criteria set by the landowner in this case.

In order for ParkingEye to cancel this Parking Charge, we will need valid evidence indicating that you did not break the terms and conditions stipulated on the signage.

This Parking Charge has been placed on hold for 14 days in order for you to provide additional/further evidence.

Alternatively, payment can be made by telephoning our offices on 0844 247 2982 or by visiting www.parkingeye.co.uk or by posting a cheque or postal order to the address detailed below.

If this charge has been paid and you choose to provide further evidence relating to your appeal, please forward this to us for consideration.

Yours faithfully

ParkingEye Team

Cheeky buggers! It's up to THEM to prove you breached their infantile rules, not you. If they continue to be unco-operative and abusive, I'd be tempted to politely tell them to take a hike.

[pennypincher]

Re: PARKING EYE ....Need new help!!

What a ******, stop whingeing and pay up. your kind are not confused and probably have got away with many more offences in the past. and looking for a way out and in desperation you came to this site which the authorities are well aware of due to letters saying "BUT ON LEGAL ADVICE YOU MUST BE WRONG I CONSULTED LEGAL BEAGLES" OMG.

[bluebottle]

Re: PARKING EYE ....Need new help!!

What a ******, stop whingeing and pay up. your kind are not confused and probably have got away with many more offences in the past. and looking for a way out and in desperation you came to this site which the authorities are well aware of due to letters saying "BUT ON LEGAL ADVICE YOU MUST BE WRONG I CONSULTED LEGAL BEAGLES" OMG.

What an unhelpful individual you are. You don't happen to work for Parking Eye by any chance? PPCs have little, if any, legal authority to enforce their faux fines, as a strike-out against Parking Eye, ruling by the Upper Tribunal against VCS and £30,000 fine imposed on OPC and its directors by a magistrates court have shown. Any PPC that resorts to threats and misrepresenting legislation in order to keep its questionable revenue stream going is skating on very thin ice indeed.

[wales01man]

Re: PARKING EYE ....Need new help!!

Never seen such a post who is this Pennypincher?
When he points out legal advice from LB if the advice is a quote from a legal book used by a qualified solicitor its legal advice surely most solicitors would i think consult the legal books all the time so it must be classed as Legal advice only exception its free

[bluebottle]

Re: PARKING EYE ....Need new help!!

Never seen such a post who is this Pennypincher?
When he points out legal advice from LB if the advice is a quote from a legal book used by a qualified solicitor its legal advice surely most solicitors would i think consult the legal books all the time so it must be classed as Legal advice only exception its free

Exactly, Wales. I'm a retired policeman and I've got a variety of legal textbooks I can refer to and there is an excellent legal library at UoP. I wouldn't mind betting PP is a PPC employee or owner.

[labman]

Re: PARKING EYE ....Need new help!!

I'd just ignore if they won't be any more helpful. The onus of proof is on them, and even then they have to take you to court and prove this is not a penalty, but a proportionate charge!

[labman]

Re: PARKING EYE ....Need new help!!

What a ******, stop whingeing and pay up. your kind are not confused and probably have got away with many more offences in the past. and looking for a way out and in desperation you came to this site which the authorities are well aware of due to letters saying "BUT ON LEGAL ADVICE YOU MUST BE WRONG I CONSULTED LEGAL BEAGLES" OMG.

Please don't humour this person by responding to the complete drivel he is uttering, he or she will get perverse enjoyment. Click report post as I shall shortly, and get the wazzock banned!

[ParkingMine]

Re: PARKING EYE ....Need new help!!

What a ******, stop whingeing and pay up. your kind are not confused and probably have got away with many more offences in the past. and looking for a way out and in desperation you came to this site which the authorities are well aware of due to letters saying "BUT ON LEGAL ADVICE YOU MUST BE WRONG I CONSULTED LEGAL BEAGLES" OMG.

You must be working for ParkingEye or unaware of what PPC are doing to innocent motorists! May be you should do your homework first before coming on this site!

[bluebottle]

Re: PARKING EYE ....Need new help!!

I'd just ignore if they won't be any more helpful. The onus of proof is on them, and even then they have to take you to court and prove this is not a penalty, but a proportionate charge!

Exactly.