Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Private parking tickets => Topic started by: Reluctant Driver on July 08, 2025, 11:19:59 pm
-
Totally normal.
Parking Eye are trying to get you to name the driver. You presumably appealed on the basis of being the registered keeper, and you have no obligation to name the driver. If you do nothing you will get a rejection of your appeal “after careful consideration” (meaning the automatic “no” button) but you will get a POPLA code. If you want advice on the POPLA appeal in due course I suggest you post the tect of your appeal.
And note that there is no register of owners.
-
I received this request for further information, driver's name and address after I appealed as the registered owner.
(https://i.imgur.com/bnCRKuO.png)
-
First let's have some facts did the driver register or attempt to register. If they did its rather than just ignoring the signs and now being unhappy about the outcome.
-
Not a chance. PE will chase you for the money. Have you tried asking the cinema to get it cancelled for you? Plan A is always the best. If the cinema is not the contractor for PE, and it is a retail park, find out who the land management company is and ask them to get it cancelled.
Otherwise, just fight it with appeal, POPLA appeal and court. If PE give it to DCB Legal to issue a claim, you can guarantee that it will be discontinued.
-
I did manage to defend a similar claim from parking eye. I parked in a hotel car park where it was free for guests, but you had to enter your reg. I did or thought I did (I may have made a mistake). I could prove I stayed at the hotel.
Parking eye sent me a letter before claim and I said their system may have malfunctioned. I asked for a record of every instance of a malfunction they had, details of how they tracked them, and an overview of the failsafes to ensure data was recorded correctly in the event of a glitch, such as a network glitch. I also asked for a record of how they test the system for such instances.
Additionally, I cited ParkingEye Ltd v Heggie. In this, the judge dismissed the case as there was no loss. In that case, there was an error entering the registration but the person had paid. There seems to be a parallel here - no payment was due so no loss.
I suspect parking eye didn't want me poking holes in the validity of their system or couldn't provide the information. This was years ago, but I suspect that in a post Horizon Post Office Scandal era, a light has been shone on overthrusting computer systems and a court would hold them to proof.
-
Dear forum members,
The driver parked in Kassam Stadium car park Oxford to watch a film at Vue cinema on 27th June 2025.
The registered keeper received the pcn in the post 7th July 2025.
(https://i.imgur.com/CwDZduC.jpeg)
(https://i.imgur.com/zsJXtbJ.jpeg)
(https://i.imgur.com/9cZuRWG.png)
https://maps.app.goo.gl/ecqSzKhke91n3yE8A (https://maps.app.goo.gl/ecqSzKhke91n3yE8A)