parking eye

[debs2601]

hi all.
I have to go to county court on the 19 august 2013 for overstaying in the carpark by 29 minutes apparently. Parking eye issued the court papers stating that they would send me the relevant paperwork for the case against me within 14 days. It actually took them 29 days for me to receive the relevant paperwork...I was wondering does anyone know if i can use this in court when i go to get the case dismissed. Any help plz people.Dont no wether to just pay the 175.00 if i have no chance of winning. thanks in advance

[pt2537]

Re: parking eye

What were the particulars of claim ?

[labman]

Re: parking eye

Please answer pt's question, but I can tell you that with the exception of just one case I know of that PEye have taken to court, all have been lost as long as the case is defended.

They seem to be having huge problems proving their claim is a genuine pre-estimate of loss, rather than a penalty. The issue of a lawful contract being in existence seems to be up to the judge on the day. www.pepipoo.com are excellent in advising on these, as they specialise solely in motoring offences. That is not to say you should not post up the POC's as requested by pt.

They are being successful in getting quite a few default judgments because the case goes undefended in court, so judgment is awarded in their favour automatically.

[charitynjw]

Re: parking eye

Please answer pt's question, but I can tell you that with the exception of just one case I know of that PEye have taken to court, all have been lost as long as the case is defended.

They seem to be having huge problems proving their claim is a genuine pre-estimate of loss, rather than a penalty. The issue of a lawful contract being in existence seems to be up to the judge on the day. www.pepipoo.com are excellent in advising on these, as they specialise solely in motoring offences. That is not to say you should not post up the POC's as requested by pt.

They are being successful in getting quite a few default judgments because the case goes undefended in court, so judgment is awarded in their favour automatically.

Let us know how you get on, though, if you go to pepipoo.
It's helpful for other posters.
:okay:

[debs2601]

Re: parking eye

I over stayed in the carpark by 29. minutes.because I wouldnt pay they are taking me through the county court route. My case is to be heard on the 19th august they want £175.00 off me. which I think is lidicrous.The court paper I recieved stated that parking eye would issue me with the relevant paperwork to defend their case against me signed by someone called rachael..... within 14 days....I recieved the relevant post dated paperwork 29 days later.....so as I see it they broke their agreement by being late just as I did overstaying in the carpark. hope this makes a bit more sense.thanks

[labman]

Re: parking eye

On the court papers they sent you, there will be some "Particulars of Claim." Please could you post these up.

[debs2601]

Re: parking eye

i will do when i get home at 5 today. thanks debby

[debs2601]

Re: parking eye

poc as follows
Claim for monies outstandingfrom the defendant,as registered keeper, in rellationto a parking chArge,issued 26/10/12 for parking without authority on private land.parking eyes automated number plate recognition (anpr) system, monitering britannia bloom street, manchester m1 3la Captured vehicle mm----z enetering and leaving the car park,a parking without purchasing sufficient time. The signage clearly displayedat the entrance to and throughout the car park, states this is private land, is mananged by parkingeye ltd, and is a paid parking site, along with other terms and conditions by which those who park on the site agree to be bound. in accordance with the terms and cconditions ssst out in the signage the parking charge became payable. Notice under the protection of freedom act 2012 has been given under Sch 4 making the keeper liable.
I will provide the defendant with sepArate detailed particulars within 14 days after service of the claim.

[CleverClogs]

Re: parking eye

monitoring britannia bloom street, manchester m1 3la

Where on Bloom Street is the car park? Is it the one between Sackville Street and Abingdon Street?

[bluebottle]

Re: parking eye

Two things immediately come to mind -

1. Unjustifiable Enrichment;
2. Failure to Quantify and Qualify Evidence.

Did anyone actually physically witness the vehicle entering and leaving the car park with their own eyes? As I have said before, ANPR camera shots are not what I would regard as reliable evidence, due to the scope for abuse, manipulation of images and fraudulent misrepresentation. The most PE are entitled to is the parking fee pro rata for the 29 minutes, plus a few pennies for the initial letter, which is probably a standard letter which they could call up and print out with little or no effort. TBH, I am of the opinion PE cannot and will not be able to prove existence of an enforceable contract, other than the parking fee itself, as the charge they are demanding has "Unenforceable Penalty" written across it in large letters. I would reckon putting PE on strict proof, unless already done, should give them something to think about. However, if they want to lose yet another case, let the silly buggers carry on. I am very surprised a judge has not warned them that their claims could be adjudged to be vexatious or without merit and they are risking having their access to the courts system restricted or blocked.

[debs2601]

Re: parking eye

yes that is the carpark i was in.....well ill let you now how it goes in court....wish me luck and thanks for your help.x

[CleverClogs]

Re: parking eye

yes that is the carpark i was in.

Good.

Weather permitting, I hope to get some snaps of it - and of the signage - in the next few days.

[debs2601]

Re: parking eye

I also told the court and PE that I was willing to pay the extra £2 for the extra time I was there. PE rufused to accept this.

[CleverClogs]

Re: parking eye

I also told the court and PE that I was willing to pay the extra £2 for the extra time I was there. PE refused to accept this.

Well, they would, wouldn't they?

They're greedy.

[labman]

Re: parking eye

Forgive my lack of knowledge of court proceedings, but I assume we're trying to piece together a witness statement for debs now?