Author Topic: Parking company admits technical error but still sends parking charge notices  (Read 1910 times)

0 Members and 67 Guests are viewing this topic.

My hire car was parked at a car park with numberplate recognition run by parking eye / evology on two consecutive days when the payment machine was not working
On the first day we parked and were unable to pay at the machine and could not find any other way to pay. The following morning my wife whatsapp messaged Evology about this, giving the vehicle details and asking how we could pay. Evology replied "we are aware of a technical issue with the site yesterday / today therefore no payment needs to be made for yesterday's parking". We later noted that unfortunately in my wife's initial message autocorrect had altered the numberplate by one letter.
Later that day we parked in the same spot. I tried to pay but again the machine was still not taking payment. I messaged Evology to ask providing the vehicle details (correctly) and asking how I could make payment. On this occasion, they did not reply.
We have recently received 2 letters from the car hire company informing us of 2 x £35 administrative fees (which have been charged to my credit card) followed by 2 parking charge notices from Parking eye. The car hire company have said they will waive these if we can show them a written cancellation notice.
Any advice on whether the above communication with Evology and their admission that the was a technical issue on both days is sufficient to win an appeal with Parking Eye or at POPLA much appreciated.
Thanks!

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook


Please show us the notices you have received (all pages) - redact only your name and home address, VRM, and PCN number. There's a guide to doing this here - READ THIS FIRST - Private Parking Charges Forum guide.

Please also confirm if you received anything else from ParkingEye such as a copy of your hire agreement, or if you just received from them the PCNs?

As this is a hire car, there are probably technical appeal points we can use that should have a better chance of success than ones about the payment machines.

Hi, thanks for reply. Day 1 parking charge notice attached. I haven’t received any other correspondence from parking eye, just from the car hire company.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Day 2 parking charge notice attached

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

In which case, you could appeal each along the lines of the below:

Dear Sirs,

I have received your parking charge notice ________ for vehicle registration mark ____ ___, in which you allege that the driver is liable to pay a parking charge. I am appealing in my capacity as the hirer of the vehicle. There is no obligation for me to name the driver at the time and I will not be doing so.

To hold me liable for the charge as the hirer of the vehicle, you must meet the conditions specified in Paragraph 14 of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (“the Act”). I note from your correspondence that you have failed to meet these conditions. These failures include (but are not limited to):

  • A failure to serve a Notice to Hirer containing all the information required by 14(5) of the Act.
  • A failure to include the additional documents mentioned by 13(2) of the Act.

As a result of this, you are unable to recover the specified charge from me, the hirer. As I do not have liability for this charge, I am unable to help you further with this matter. I therefore look forward to your confirmation that the charge has been cancelled. If you do not cancel, you must issue a POPLA code.

Yours faithfully,

You need to appeal each charge separately - as the hirer only. I note that for one of the charges, depending on what was said, the driver may been revealed (but only if a full name was provided), but I'd still be minded to appeal along the lines of the above for now, and see if they cancel.

Please confirm whether the PCNs you have shown us are copies of the Notice to Keeper (NtK) issued to the hire company in their name or are they the Notice to Hirer (NtH) that was sent to you by PE after the hire company transferred liability to you, the Hirer?

You can only respond to the PCNs if they are in your name. It is not established, from what you've told us, that liability was correctly transferred by the hire company.

The hire company and PE do not know the identity of the driver. The only thing known is that the Hire company is the Keeper and you are the Hirer. The driver is the entity that is liable and there is no legal obligation on the Hirer to identify the driver.

As PoFA has not been invoked, there can be no Hirer liability. So, are those PCNs that you have shown us, addressed to the Hirer or are they simply copies of the NtKs issued to the Hire company?
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain

So, are those PCNs that you have shown us, addressed to the Hirer or are they simply copies of the NtKs issued to the Hire company?
I had taken the statement "followed by 2 parking charge notices from Parking eye" to mean the notices had come directly from ParkingEye to the hirer, but this is an important clarification. OP, if the notices are addressed directly to you then you can crack on with the appeals suggested above. If not, tell us as the approach will be different.

Both PCNs were addressed to me (the hirer) and so I assume the rental company had transferred liability to me. So thanks - I will do as suggested.
A couple of questions though:
DWMB2 what makes you think the identity of the driver may have been revealed on one of the charges? Hoping I could shed light on this but can't work out what gave you that impression.
And do you think there is no grounds for appeal in Evology's admission that there was a technical problem with the payment machine?

I wouldn’t worry about the drivers identity unless it was specifically provided in writing to PE.

Did PE include the following documents with the Notice to Hirer (NtH) they sent to you?

(a) a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement;

(b) a copy of the hire agreement; and

(c) a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement.

Unlikely but we need to know. The wording on the NtH is not PoFA compliant anyway but we need to know this detail.

There is no point in trying to make an appeal about the technical failure when there is no Keeper liability and the driver has not been named. If PE don’t cancel, POPLA will.
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Quote
DWMB2 what makes you think the identity of the driver may have been revealed on one of the charges?
You mentioned having communicated with the parking company via WhatsApp - I don't know the contents of those messages. As b789 says it's probably nothing to worry about, I was just covering all bases.

Thanks for replies
No, there was nothing sent to me except the PCNs posted earlier in the thread.
There were no names used in our WhatsApp correspondence



 

Great, thanks for confirming. In which case, the appeals I suggested above should be suitable for the first stage.

Hi there
I sent the appeal letter as suggested by DWMB2 for both PCNs, appealing as the registered keeper. Parking eye sent me the following in response to the second PCN only. Should I just wait for a POPLA code?
Thanks

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

You can reply with the following:

Quote
Re: Parking Charge Notice [PCN Reference Number]

Dear Sir/Madam,

Thank you for your recent letter, in which you’ve kindly informed me that my appeal has been placed on hold for 28 days while you await information about the identity of the driver. Unfortunately, I must decline your request to do your job for you.

Allow me to remind you of a few key points:

1. As the hirer of the vehicle, I am under no legal obligation to name the driver. You might wish to take a closer look at the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) for clarification on this.

2. You have failed to meet the strict requirements of paragraph 14 of Schedule 4 of PoFA to hold me, as the hirer, liable. Specifically, your Notice to Hirer was not accompanied by copies of the necessary documents as mandated by PoFA paragraph 14(2)(a). I will leave it to you to do the necessary research in order to understand what those documents are.

Without full compliance, your attempt to transfer liability to me, the Hirer, is quite simply, unlawful. Given this, I strongly suggest that you either:

1. Cancel this Parking Charge Notice immediately; or

2. Send me a POPLA code, where you can waste some of your huge profits by paying the fee for a POPLA assessor to confirm your failure to comply with PoFA and invalidate your PCN entirely.

I trust this clears up any confusion and that you will now stop wasting both your time and mine pursuing a PCN that has no lawful basis.

I look forward to your confirmation that the PCN has been cancelled or receiving the POPLA code, should you wish to throw good money after bad.

Yours faithfully,

[Your Name]
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain

Hi
Unfortunately my appeal (as hirer) for the parking charge notice dated 22/10 was unsuccessful and I have been given a POPLA reference. How do you suggest I proceed? Are POPLA interested that the payment machine was not working and I contacted Evology - or should I stick with their failure to transfer liability to the hirer?
Parking Eye have not yet replied to my appeal to the pcn from 21/10 (sent on 12/11) - should I chase them up (I need proof of cancellation in order to be refunded admin charges from the hire complany)?
Thanks for any advice.