Wednesday, 11 December 2013

ParkingEye shows Christmas Spirit

The Parking Prankster has learned that ParkingEye has refunded £60 to an elderly couple in their 90s who fell foul of the time limit at The Range.

This is an unusual case. The appeal did not happen until after the £60 was paid, and parking companies are usually fairly hard hearted in these circumstances.

The Prankster commends ParkingEye for this action.

As ParkingEye currently uphold over 55% of appeals The Prankster feels it would be helpful for ParkingEye to be more explicit over the possible reasons for appeal on their charge notices and their web site. After all, if over half of their tickets are wrongly issued it would be helpful to all parties if all incorrectly issued tickets were cancelled, and if this was done as early as possible in the appeals process by encouraging motorists to engage as soon as possible. If ParkingEye are forced to cancel tickets later on, it causes costs and wasted time for all parties.

To get ParkingEye started, here are some suggestions

  • if the vehicle broke down
  • if anybody with mobility issues was involved
  • if more than £30 was spent in the store
  • if a breastfeeding mother was involved
  • if anyone needing more time under the equalities act 2010 was involved
  • if the car park was visited twice, but the ANPR was faulty and only recorded one visit
  • if the vehicle was sold and no longer belongs to the motorist
  • if the car park was badly designed and it is possible to enter and exit without passing the ANPR cameras
  • if an accident or medical emergency caused the delay
  • if the overstay was not more than 10 minutes and therefore within the grace period
  • if the pay and display ticket machine was faulty
  • if the signage was not clear and visible
  • if ParkingEye do not have a contract dated before the parking event
  • if the charge is not a true pre-estimate of loss

Happy Parking

The Parking Prankster
at

4 comments:

  1. DBC11 December 2013 at 06:02

    But don't forget that POPLA has ruled on countless occasions that PE are not entitled to any of that money anyway.. So why thank them for demanding money that's not due to them?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Unknown11 December 2013 at 09:52

    I don't commend them at all, they do nothing but intimidate people, and make their invoices look as if they come from an authority. Sorry prankster but I want this company liquidated alongside their brethren ! They are nothing more than leach on motorists and they deserve no praise or quarter, when they go out of business then I consider our job is done.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Custard Pie11 December 2013 at 23:55

    Craig, if they followed Parky's suggestions, which are both common sense and legally viable, then they would have no business. No invoice they issue is legally enforceable when it comes down to it.

    It's only motorist ignorance, incompetence and the English legal system that allows them to continue to exist.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Unknown12 December 2013 at 11:36

    I'm sorry but a leopard doesn't change their spots! We've seen this ANPR Ltd and their change from being clampers. Parking Eye are lying, cheating , scamming scumbags! They deserve nothing more than being liquidated, take a look at the PE blogs on this site to see that this is true.

    There is to much water under the bridge for them, they cannot suddenly become ethical and an upstanding management company, it's too late for that, crapita has bought a poisoned chalice, they will see that they can't keep these scum on the straight and narrow.

    ReplyDelete