Parking Eye

[Crepello]

Re: Parking Eye

...and yet elsewhere the supposition seems to be that those named on DRP's successful CJ victims list were those that didn't engage?? :tinysmile_hmm_t2:

I think there is less chance of them pursuing you if you ignore them completely. Was it you who had court papers issued from Northampton a few weeks back? Any updates?

[andyb000!]

Re: Parking Eye

I think there is less chance of them pursuing you if you ignore them completely. Was it you who had court papers issued from Northampton a few weeks back? Any updates?

Not I - I've only had a Notice of Intended Litigation - so far...

[CleverClogs]

Re: Parking Eye

Here's another thought...

From Schedule 4:
"3(1)In this Schedule “relevant land” means any land (including land above or below ground level) other than—
(a)a highway maintainable at the public expense (within the meaning of section 329(1) of the Highways Act 1980);
(b)a parking place which is provided or controlled by a traffic authority;
(c)any land (not falling within paragraph (a) or (b)) on which the parking of a vehicle is subject to statutory control. "

could the last ('statutory control') include land on which there are Planning Authority restrictions as part of Development Control as to the hours that the store (and therefore the car park) may be open?

No.

It refers to areas such as the Royal Parks, the use of which is governed by statute.

[CleverClogs]

Re: Parking Eye

Not sure if this has been raised before - as this thread is getting a bit long - but PE's PCN includes a warning that if you name the driver, and the person named denies being the driver, they will pursue you(!)

Where does that leave you if you have named the driver correctly and you are then pursued?

You have the defence that you complied with your obligations under the stupid Act and that the parking parasites therefore do not have the right to seek damages from you.

You can hardly be liable for losses arising from their ineptitude.

[andyb000!]

Re: Parking Eye

I've revisited the site where the alleged transgression involving the family car (I wasn't the driver) took place.

One thing I did notice at the entrance to the car park was that it looks like the ANPR cameras are angled so that one's car is still on the public highway when the registration number is being recorded. Is this at all relevant?

A

[CleverClogs]

Re: Parking Eye

One thing I did notice at the entrance to the car park was that it looks like the ANPR cameras are angled so that one's car is still on the public highway when the registration number is being recorded. Is this at all relevant?

Was the motor-car being reversed into the car park?

[andyb000!]

Re: Parking Eye

Was the motor-car being reversed into the car park?

I'm presuming not on that occasion(!) - but it's tempting to drive up to the line, reverse back out and then come back a lot later and reverse up to the camera - and then see what happens...

[icky221]

Re: Parking Eye

I have now recieved a letter from Debt Recovery Plus Ltd saying that to "avoid escalation" payment should be paid within 14 days. Carry on ignoring ??? advice please PsS the sum as gone up to £150

[labman]

Re: Parking Eye

See other related thread!

[icky221]

Re: Parking Eye

Hello labman, thanks for all the help you give to this wonderful site. My own case with PE is with a store car park that is FREE for the first two hrs, I used it for 3.25hrs at night when the store was closing/closed. Didn't notice signs that night but they are there telling you that you will be charged £100 for any overstay. Letters duly arrived 3 from PE and now this from Debt collectors. I have ignored all, because none have had to be signed for. Is this the right course of action in your opinion.

[labman]

Re: Parking Eye

IMO, yes. Ideally I would say appeal and then ignore, but that is only because it costs the PPC's a lot of money. Out of interest, are / were the signs clearly lit at night or would they have been easily missed?

Ignoring sounds good, though be ready for the onslaught of increasingly threatening letters.

[icky221]

Re: Parking Eye

The car park was illuminated. Just didn't notice them or the cameras that take your number.

[CleverClogs]

Re: Parking Eye

The car park was illuminated. Just didn't notice them or the cameras that take your number.

Then the notices were insufficiently obvious and/or inadequately lighted.

Even if the parking parasites did try to sue, the official Department of Transport guide (attached) provides a clue for how to defend such a claim. In the FAQ section at the end Q1, on page 23, states that the parking charge must be merely compensatory if the claim is based on contract law and that the landowner must justify his claim for losses if the claim is based on trespass. Penalties are not permitted.

[d0nnyoz]

Re: Parking Eye

Oh yes! I'm joining the club now!
I got my first letter from ParkingEye today and I feel privileged!

Is the advice still to ignore everything??
I'm very tempted to write to them and tell them where to shove it, but I think the sound advice here is to simply keep everything and ignore the lot!
Correct?

[labman]

Re: Parking Eye

Absolutely! If you're not appealing it to cost them money, then just ignore, otherwise, appeal and then ignore.