Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Waggytail

Pages: [1] 2
1
Here is ParkingEye's response to the letter you drafted - they have not addressed any of the points made......


"Dear Ms. X
 
We are writing in relation to your below correspondence regarding Parking Charge reference xxxxxxxx
 
Our records confirm that the Notice to Keeper was issued on Saturday, 21/12/2024 and was deemed served on the second working day - Tuesday, 24/12/2024. A further letter was issued on Monday, 30/12/2024, which you have acknowledged receiving on Friday, 03/01/2025.
 
Please be advised that there is no requirement for us to send correspondence via recorded delivery. We have provided sufficient evidence confirming that the letter was sent via our mailing provider. We have no incentive to withhold correspondence, as it is in our interest for matters to be resolved promptly, either through payment or appeal, rather than through referral to debt recovery agents or legal proceedings.
 
Our position therefore remains unchanged. As a gesture of goodwill, the Parking Charge remains payable at the discounted rate of £60.00. The same rate that was applicable when the initial Notice to Keeper was issued. The case has been placed on hold at this amount for 7 days.
 
Payment can be made by telephoning 0330 555 4444, by visiting www.parkingeye.co.uk/payments or by posting a cheque/postal order to Parkingeye Ltd, PO Box 117, Blyth, NE24 9EJ.  Please ensure you write your reference number on the reverse of any cheque/postal order so the payment can be allocated.
 
We have now closed this complaint, and no further responses will be issued via this process."


I assume from this that if I don't pay within 7 days they will pass it to debt recovery agents?


2
Thanks for the draft letter. I have sent it and will update when I get a response.

3
Hello. I have received an email today from ParkingEye. They are just reiterating what they have said before and as proof of postage have shown a section from the report from the mail consolidator (exactly the same as the BPA provided)…..


“We are writing in response to your recent correspondence regarding Parking Charge reference xxxx, which was passed to us by the British Parking Association.
 
The signage located at Home Bargains Shipley confirms the customer only car park has a 2-hour maximum stay period in operation. Vehicle registration xxxx remained within the car park on 18/12/2024 for 2 hours 21 minutes, therefore the terms and conditions were breached and the Parking Charge was incurred.
 
Our records confirm that correspondence was issued via the post on 21/12/2024 and 30/12/2024. We do appreciate your frustrations regarding the postal issues; however, any Royal Mail postal issues are unfortunately out Parkingeye’s control. Our mail consolidator report shows the below record of postage :-

We can confirm that complaint reference #xxxx, received on 04/01/2025 via our website was responded to via email on 22/01/2025. Copies of the postal correspondence were provided, together with the appeals procedure, our website link and postal address. The case was placed on hold to allow you to submit an appeal, or make a payment at the discounted amount.
 
Our records show that no appeal has been received to date and Parking Charge xxxx remains outstanding at £60.00.”

4
I assume that the first one is the Notice to Keeper (that did not arrive) and the second one is the reminder that I received on 3rd January. Can you confirm what are the likely next steps from ParkingEye now that the BPA have closed the case? The SAR will likely take weeks to come back (I have had no notification that they have been received). Many thanks.

5
This is the email they sent with the information in the body of the email they did not attach a document.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

6
Hello. Here is the extract from the iMail report/ Outbound Correspondence that the BPA have suggested is proof that the NtK was sent. The iMail report clearly has my details attached to it, which no doubt proves it was printed but the screenshot from the outbound correspondence has no such detail……

Please find below the data you have requested.

Below shows the mail consolidator iMail report which shows the record of postage.

 UserName: ParkingeyePremium
FirstName:Parkingeye
LastName: Premium
CompanyName: Parking Eye   
DocumentId: xxxxxxx
ShortDocumentId:xxxxxxxxx
Product: Letter
Rate: Standard
International No
Colour:Yes
FullBleed: No
DoubleSided: Yes
SideCount: 2
Reference: PCN ref: xxxx Outbound Correspondence: xxxxx
RecipientName: xxxxx
Postcode: xxxxx
Address: xxxxxx
SubmissionDateTime: 21/12/2024
PrintedDateTime: 24/12/2024 07:01


Further to the above, the below shows the date in which the correspondence was sent:

All Outbound Correspondence


Date Issued      Description         Status
 
21/12/2024      Letter1 Ltr01 – 210      Sent

30/12/2024      Letter2 – Ltr02-210      Sent

7
Thanks for this.

I have posted everything I have received and do not have a copy of the iMail report or screenshot so I will go back to her and request a copy.

8
Okay but for clarity I take it that the iMail report and screenshot isn’t sufficient to prove the Notice to Keeper was sent? So ParkingEye hasn’t shown compliance with PoFA /PPSCoP and the BPA in ignoring this is acting as an enabler rather than a regulatory body?

Should I serve ParkingEye with a SAR as well?

9
I have just received this from BPA and they have now closed the case....

"Dear C,
 
I have reviewed your complaint and can advise as follows.
 
The charge was issued because the vehicle remained on site for 2 hours and 21 minutes and the maximum stay was 2 hours.  Parking Eye have advised no appeal has been registered with them to contest the charge.
 
Serious GDPR breach
 
I have responded separately on this point and can confirm that no breach has occurred as the email was not sent to Euro Car Parks.
 

Misrepresentation of “Recorded Delivery” vs “Proof of Postage”
 
I want to clarify that our investigation is limited to breaches of our Code of Practice. My colleague previously mentioned that we cannot intervene in matters concerning missing mail, as it is challenging to verify whether an item has been sent or received.
 
It is quite possible that a notice was dispatched but did not reach you. Therefore, this is a matter that has to be taken up directly with Parking Eye
 
Parking Eye have confirmed that the original Notice to Keeper was sent on December 21, 2024, and they have provided us with their iMail report detailing the postage record. This confirms that the letter was processed and prepared for mailing on December 21, 2024, at 07:01. Additionally, Parking Eye have supplied a screenshot indicating when the outbound correspondence was sent. It shows that the Notice to Keeper was sent on December 21, 2024, followed by a second letter sent on December 30, 2024. Both letters were sent to the address registered with the DVLA.
 
Based on the evidence provided by Parking Eye, we believe it aligns with the requirements outlined in the Code of Practice.
 
I appreciate your feedback regarding our actions, and I understand your concerns. I hope the information provided clarifies our position.
 
Please know that we take adherence to our Code very seriously, and we are committed to investigating any claims of noncompliance if supported by evidence.
 
As I have not identified a breach of our Code, I have closed the case.  Parking Eye will respond to your most recent communication shortly. "
 

10
Okay. So I should go back to them and say that the snippet of the email they sent to ParkingEye nor their claim that there has been no GDPR breach does not constitute evidential proof.  The dismissive way my complaint has been handled coupled with the selective/misleading responses received suggests a Subject Access Request is required.

Please provide me with copies of all correspondence/notes/emails held/sent/received by AOS/BPA relating to my complaint including those shared with/received from all external organisations from the 20/02/25 to the present day.

Is the above sufficient?

11
I have received another email from the BPA (AOS Investigations Team) confirming that there has been no breach of GDPR.  They consider that aspect of the complaint closed and will be in touch once the other items have been reviewed.

 

12
The BPA have sent the following email today....

"Dear C

I apologise for the mistype in my previous email. I can confirm no email was sent to Euro Car Parks. Please see the snippet attached confirming your email was sent to Parkingeye.

As per your request, I have passed your correspondence to the Senior Compliance Manager who will be in touch in due course."



The snippet shows:

FROM: AOS
SENT: 18 March 2025 11:44
TO:   *******@parkingeye.co.uk
SUBJECT: FW:BPA *******

13
Thanks for this. Should I be requesting that the BPA compliance officer dealing with this complaint escalates it to a more senior member of the team? She has had two opportunities to address the issues raised but the failures you've highlighted suggest she is out of her depth.

14
Hello. This is the response I received from the BPA today……

They appear to have forwarded to Euro Car Parks rather than ParkingEye!


“Dear ,
 
Thank you for your response.
 
I have forwarded your query to Euro Car Parks who will contact you directly shortly.
 
Please be advised we deem it acceptable to allow 14 days for the operator to make contact with you.
 
We did not include the sentences to mislead as I previously advised – further to this, the Notes within the Code of Practice are considered “best practice”
 
“Where “NOTES” within the Code purport to impose a standard on an operator they are not mandatory. They are an indication of best practice which should be aspired to by those managing land. It is recognised, that for an operator, complying with the “NOTE” is not always possible and there will be circumstances where compliance is unachievable and sometimes unhelpful. Not complying with a “NOTE” is not a breach of the Code. Parking operators and motorists are reminded of the spirit of the Code which is accountability and compliance”
 
Operators are not obliged to send letters via recordered delivery, the Code of Practice does not cover this. When an operator can provide a copy of the Parking Charge, we deem this compliant with the Code of Practice.
 
 
Kind regards


Compliance Team
British Parking Association

15
Thank you for the draft letter. I have sent it and will update you when I receive their response. Many thanks.

Pages: [1] 2