Parking Eye Court Claim

[sjj88]

Hi guys, I joined this site yesterday as I am looking for some help. Earlier on in the year I received a parking fine from the company Parking Eye, the reason being I was parked up at in my local hospital car park for 1 minute more than I had paid for. I feel reluctant to pay the £70 fine that I have been told to pay as I was there for only 1 minute than I had paid for and also I have heard that their fines are also unenforceable. I would like any information on whether this is true. I have been told by friends who have received similar fines that it is unenforceable and to ignore it, is this the right advice as I have had several letters from them about the matter and also the last one threatening to take me to court. I would be grateful on any advice that people on this site could give me regarding this matter.

Many Thanks,

SJJ88

[mystery1]

Re: Parking Eye Court Claim

There are many people who will tell you they are unenforceable. Technically that is sound. However people have lost in court. The circumstances of each ticket are different. Hopefully much of this will be cleared up by the Parking Eye v Beavis appeal to be heard early 2015.

In your case, for 1 minute you'd have a very good argument (aside from the normal ones) to have the case thrown out because a court will not normally be concerned with trifling matters. There is also the case that 1 minute is almost certainly less than the time it took to enter and exit so in reality you were not parked for longer than allowed.



It is always easier to appeal and use popla but it seems you are too late. I would ignore all bar court papers or a letter before action.

M1

[sjj88]

Re: Parking Eye Court Claim

There are many people who will tell you they are unenforceable. Technically that is sound. However people have lost in court. The circumstances of each ticket are different. Hopefully much of this will be cleared up by the Parking Eye v Beavis appeal to be heard early 2015.

In your case, for 1 minute you'd have a very good argument (aside from the normal ones) to have the case thrown out because a court will not normally be concerned with trifling matters. There is also the case that 1 minute is almost certainly less than the time it took to enter and exit so in reality you were not parked for longer than allowed.



It is always easier to appeal and use popla but it seems you are too late. I would ignore all bar court papers or a letter before action.

M1

Thankyou for your reply, what would you say was the best thing to do for me now? Ignore any more letters or just pay it off or something else?

[Kati]

Re: Parking Eye Court Claim

My understanding of M1's comment would be - ignore unless you get court papers or a 'letter before action' :tinysmile_twink_t2:
K x

[sjj88]

Re: Parking Eye Court Claim

I have attached the last letter that I received from parking eye, it mentions about a county court claim. Please if any of you have time could you give it a quick read and let me know what you would recommend me do now.

Really appreciate any help I can get,

Thankyou

[MissFM]

Re: Parking Eye Court Claim

sjj88 - Please would you edit out all your personal details from that letter!

That looks to me like a letter before action, not that I'm an expert - you need [MENTION=5354]mystery1[/MENTION] x

[mystery1]

Re: Parking Eye Court Claim

I have attached the last letter that I received from parking eye, it mentions about a county court claim. Please if any of you have time could you give it a quick read and let me know what you would recommend me do now.

Really appreciate any help I can get,

Thankyou

Dear Parking Eye,


I received your letter headed xxxxx on xxxx the contents of which are noted. It would appear that this is a letter before action although it is not compliant with the pre action protocols.


The pre action protocols dictate that in a letter before action the claimant should set out the details of the matter in writing and a clear summary of the facts on which the claim is based.


The claimant should also list the essential documents on which the claimant intends to rely,set out the form of ADR (if any) that the claimant considers the most suitable and invite the defendant to agree to this and refer the defendant to the Practice Direction and in particular draw attention to paragraph 4 concerning the court's powers to impose sanctions for failure to comply with the Practice Direction.


I would suggest that popla is an appropriate method of of ADR as they are the specialist body who only holding private parking appeals. It is also the same ADR as was referred to by judges in 3JD05448 ParkingEye v Gilmartin, 3JD00719 ParkingEye v Mr O, 3JD10502 ParkingEye v Mrs P, Blackburn County Court for example


Obviously you may not know exactly what documents you will require to rely on at this time however, as claimant, it is your duty to prove your claim. As such there are certain documents that you will have to produce such as the contract you say that has been entered into between yourself and the driver, copies of your contract with the land holder which allows you to take legal action in your own name as well as the original parking charge notice. I note that in the cases of Gardam, Sharma, Clarke and Gosnold amongst others there were issues with these.




If financial loss is claimed, an explanation of how the amount has been calculated.




I would point you to the supreme court case of Al Rawi & Ors v The Security Service & Ors [2011] UKSC 34 (13 July 2011)




Lord Kerr stated "As I have observed in the associated case of Tariq v Home Office [2011] UKSC 35, the right to know and effectively challenge the opposing case has long been recognised by the common law as a fundamental feature of the judicial process. I referred in my judgment in that case to various celebrated expressions of that principle and I need not repeat them here. The right to be informed of the case made against you is not merely a feature of the adversarial system of trial, it is an elementary and essential prerequisite of fairness. Without it, as Upjohn LJ put it in In re K (Infants) [1963] Ch 381, a trial between opposing parties cannot lay claim to the marque of judicial proceedings."




I firmly believe that your normal modus operandi to refuse to disclose contracts due to commercial sensitivity is contrary to natural justice. I will an objection to any attempt to introduce it in a redacted form on this basis. It is quite clearly a required piece of evidence. You know you need it to make your case The pre action protocols dictate that you should give me a copy. The over riding objective dictates you should give me a copy. Should you not produce a copy for me i will certainly be making a case that your actions be unreasonable and seeking full costs of trial should i win citing both the pre action protocols and CPR 27.14 2 (g).


Please take this response as an acknowledgement of your LBA to which a full response will be provided within 14 days of rectification of the flaws in your letter. I am taking advice from persons with experience in these matters however that advice is limited until compliance with the above faults is achieved.




Yours etc


M1

[Amethyst]

Re: Parking Eye Court Claim

Attachment unapproved due to personal info. Thanks miss fm and mystery1 for flagging it up.

[sjj88]

Re: Parking Eye Court Claim

Dear Parking Eye,


I received your letter headed xxxxx on xxxx the contents of which are noted. It would appear that this is a letter before action although it is not compliant with the pre action protocols.


The pre action protocols dictate that in a letter before action the claimant should set out the details of the matter in writing and a clear summary of the facts on which the claim is based.


The claimant should also list the essential documents on which the claimant intends to rely,set out the form of ADR (if any) that the claimant considers the most suitable and invite the defendant to agree to this and refer the defendant to the Practice Direction and in particular draw attention to paragraph 4 concerning the court's powers to impose sanctions for failure to comply with the Practice Direction.


I would suggest that popla is an appropriate method of of ADR as they are the specialist body who only holding private parking appeals. It is also the same ADR as was referred to by judges in 3JD05448 ParkingEye v Gilmartin, 3JD00719 ParkingEye v Mr O, 3JD10502 ParkingEye v Mrs P, Blackburn County Court for example


Obviously you may not know exactly what documents you will require to rely on at this time however, as claimant, it is your duty to prove your claim. As such there are certain documents that you will have to produce such as the contract you say that has been entered into between yourself and the driver, copies of your contract with the land holder which allows you to take legal action in your own name as well as the original parking charge notice. I note that in the cases of Gardam, Sharma, Clarke and Gosnold amongst others there were issues with these.




If financial loss is claimed, an explanation of how the amount has been calculated.




I would point you to the supreme court case of Al Rawi & Ors v The Security Service & Ors [2011] UKSC 34 (13 July 2011)




Lord Kerr stated "As I have observed in the associated case of Tariq v Home Office [2011] UKSC 35, the right to know and effectively challenge the opposing case has long been recognised by the common law as a fundamental feature of the judicial process. I referred in my judgment in that case to various celebrated expressions of that principle and I need not repeat them here. The right to be informed of the case made against you is not merely a feature of the adversarial system of trial, it is an elementary and essential prerequisite of fairness. Without it, as Upjohn LJ put it in In re K (Infants) [1963] Ch 381, a trial between opposing parties cannot lay claim to the marque of judicial proceedings."




I firmly believe that your normal modus operandi to refuse to disclose contracts due to commercial sensitivity is contrary to natural justice. I will an objection to any attempt to introduce it in a redacted form on this basis. It is quite clearly a required piece of evidence. You know you need it to make your case The pre action protocols dictate that you should give me a copy. The over riding objective dictates you should give me a copy. Should you not produce a copy for me i will certainly be making a case that your actions be unreasonable and seeking full costs of trial should i win citing both the pre action protocols and CPR 27.14 2 (g).


Please take this response as an acknowledgement of your LBA to which a full response will be provided within 14 days of rectification of the flaws in your letter. I am taking advice from persons with experience in these matters however that advice is limited until compliance with the above faults is achieved.




Yours etc


M1

Thankyou so much for your help everyone especially giving me a letter like that to use. Schoolboy error not getting rid of my personal details lol. So if I send this letter as a reply to parking eye are you suggesting that this should be enough to back me up for them not to make a claim against me?

[mystery1]

Re: Parking Eye Court Claim

Not really. It will end up in court. You want to delay as much as possible in order to get closer to the Beavis result (due February). You also wish to put yourself in to a position where parking look unreasonable as when it comes to costs if you've follow the process better you stand a better chance of getting less/no costs against or even more costs if you defeat them. The pre action protocols are an important part of the process but ultimately can be ignored if you don't care that the court can penalise you for failure to follow them.

M1

[sjj88]

Re: Parking Eye Court Claim

Not really. It will end up in court. You want to delay as much as possible in order to get closer to the Beavis result (due February). You also wish to put yourself in to a position where parking look unreasonable as when it comes to costs if you've follow the process better you stand a better chance of getting less/no costs against or even more costs if you defeat them. The pre action protocols are an important part of the process but ultimately can be ignored if you don't care that the court can penalise you for failure to follow them.

M1

Hmm ok, not fully sure what all that means as I am not too clever when it comes to legal stuff like this. Unsure whether just to bite the bullet and pay it now just to get it all sorted.

[mystery1]

Re: Parking Eye Court Claim

Hmm ok, not fully sure what all that means as I am not too clever when it comes to legal stuff like this. Unsure whether just to bite the bullet and pay it now just to get it all sorted.

Don't pay it.

If you wish to pay negotiate a settlement. You'll probably get out of this for £50 if you're good at it. You'll still feel like they mugged you but it's less stressful.

M1