3. Messages

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 - Finepatsy2025

Pages: [1]
1
Private parking tickets / Re: Parking Eye not in receipt of sufficient evidence to confirm whether the T&C's were breach PCN July 2025 moving imag
« on: September 28, 2025, 09:19:32 pm »
Thanks all - with only around 24hrs to go (7 days doesn't seem long to address 25 pages of evidence), I'll stick with the statement suggested in the last comment, but will let you know how it goes.
Cheers again

2
Private parking tickets / Re: Parking Eye not in receipt of sufficient evidence to confirm whether the T&C's were breach PCN July 2025 moving imag
« on: September 25, 2025, 08:45:41 pm »
A quick update all: Popla have finally 'begun' the appeal process and give 7 days for more evidence,but have followed the direction give here in this group to use the text on NTK arriving too late to establish responsibility.

Parking Eye have submitted around 25 pages of evidence roughly including: -

- pictures of cars leaving an returning from the original notice
- a site location map for signage
- images of 3-4 signs
- some sort of responsibility to manage the car park
- a statement that rambles referring to original case including something about responding to the notice alone, was tacit acceptance of responsibility.

Given the previous comments that I should rely on the NTK timescale flaw fro the outset. Do I do anything or just rely on original appeal grounds and wait for the outcome?

Thanks as always chaps/ chapasses

3
Private parking tickets / Re: Parking Eye not in receipt of sufficient evidence to confirm whether the T&C's were breach PCN July 2025 moving imag
« on: September 10, 2025, 09:14:46 pm »
Thanks all, submitted as suggested. Will let you know how this pans-out.

Thanks once again for your time.

4
Private parking tickets / Re: Parking Eye not in receipt of sufficient evidence to confirm whether the T&C's were breach PCN July 2025 moving imag
« on: September 10, 2025, 07:42:44 pm »
This is priceless - thank you.

On opening the POPLA appeal i lists 6 grounds - none of which obviously match my situation: -

Stolen car
not improperly parked
excessive fee
not the driver
extreme circumstances
Other.

Am assuming its other and then to d little more than paste the quoted section above?
Thanks again

NB. Intellectually malnourished has given me the biggest grin of my day

5
Private parking tickets / Re: Parking Eye not in receipt of sufficient evidence to confirm whether the T&C's were breach PCN July 2025 moving imag
« on: September 09, 2025, 10:51:48 pm »
Cheers folks,
Appeal refusal-letter dated August 8th. Again unconvinced this arrived until at least a week later, perhaps the 15th.

The terms on the POPLA paperwork say I have '28 days' (rather than 33)?

So seeing this is clearly stacked against driver, 33 down to 28, 28 minus the time to mail the letter, I'm assuming the appeal POPLA date as expired.

To clarify the obvious element to my mind, they have admitted in writing they don't have enough evidence to confirm if T&C's were broken, and as they have missed the opportunity to identify the driver - so now they no clear evidence of any offense, by an unknown person.

As a third and final matter, they have acknowledged in writing that they've been made aware of both of these flaws and disregarded them.

From my limited experience of attending court for prosecutions in work, any one reasonable flaw in evidencing either the offense or the offender, gets royal flipped out of magistrates court, often with a flea in the ear of the prosecution and cost to boot.

Here there are three factors seemingly casting significant doubt over their whether this case should even be in court.

Assuming I've missed the POPLA deadline from what I've read - why are the measures for this case so far removed from what I've seen is the general bar in court - does this even stand a chance of being progressed let alone winning (I'm assuming in Magistrates court?).
Oh! and what action if any would follow if I av missed the date - nothing until court?
Tanks both for you views on this.

6
Private parking tickets / Re: Parking Eye not in receipt of sufficient evidence to confirm whether the T&C's were breach PCN July 2025 moving imag
« on: September 08, 2025, 08:01:59 pm »
Hi,
This is really helpful - thank you.

Here's the rear of the first letter delivered after almost 7 weeks (I've assumed is now the NTK). Yes very long time ago to know who was driving and why. and yes I am the keeper: -

https://imgur.com/a/BSnKATr

So I've understood correctly, I think you are saying?: -

- 7 weeks is legally too long for them to require the details of the driver, hence not mentioning FoI Act on rear?

- So there is no need to establish who was driving, nor are they able to safely accuse any particular person of causing the act.

- and I think? ... that although they won't let this go for some time, that their case is far harder to evidence and they are unlikely to pursue to court - and I should not go to POPLA or enter into further dialogue with them unless it gets to court?

Am really surprised to be frank that admitting in writing that they have 'insufficient information to confirm if a driver broke the T&C's' isn't a fundamental admission they have no case. (but what do I know).

Thanks once again - please just advise what my best next action would be if you were in my position.
Cheers

7
Private parking tickets / Re: Parking Eye not in receipt of sufficient evidence to confirm whether the T&C's were breach PCN July 2025 moving imag
« on: September 04, 2025, 08:48:03 pm »
Apologies I thought I'd included everything. Here's the redacted letters. These are the only contact received.

https://imgur.com/a/2Ki4RcB

https://imgur.com/a/2Ki4RcB

Thanks

8
Private parking tickets / Parking Eye not in receipt of sufficient evidence to confirm whether the T&C's were breach PCN July 2025 moving images
« on: September 03, 2025, 10:14:57 pm »
Hi,
A PCN has been receive trough the post 7 weeks after an event, where no ticket was issued prior.
The alleged incident was returning to a car park within one hour (both for circa 10minutes).

The images show the car pausing at a pedestrian crossing, and again at another point on the site in transit, presumably attempting to establish entering and leaving the site.

No driver has been identified and the appeal  has been refused.

Grounds were: no location for parking was been given beyond the entire retail park (most of which is not controlled by the company), nor any images of the car being stationary.

There is genuinely no certainty the car was parked, but purchases on other parts of the park are shown in accounts for a similar time, with the suspicion this is capturing the car passing through rather than parking.

Without clearer information, the owner is unclear who was driving, which shop this relates to (as seems to be off site) and if the car even stopped to park.
Should a POPLA application be carried out - or just left given the Parking eye response confirms they do not know the driver, and that they are "... not in receipt of sufficient evidence to confirm whether the T&C's were not breached"
Sounds like they don't know, so have refused my appeal.
Many thanks

Pages: [1]