Wednesday, 6 August 2014

ParkingEye issue £1 million worth of tickets when statute does not apply. DVLA turn a blind eye.

ParkingEye have issued over £1 million worth of ticket at Town Quay, Southampton, falsely stating keeper liability applies under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. The DVLA have been made aware but have decided to turn a blind eye and continue to provide ParkingEye with keeper details.

In  the past, parking companies have been banned from DVLA access if they have falsely stated keeper liability applies. However Hugh Evans of the DVLA has apparently taken the decision that ParkingEye are too big a company for the rules to apply to, and has refused to apply sanctions against them. Although the DVLA forced MET Parking to cancel tickets when a similar transgression occurred and to stop the practice, ParkingEye seem to have a magic immunity where the DVLA is concerned.

Since 2012 ParkingEye have issued 18,627 tickets at Town Quay at rates between £100 and £110. This would have netted the DVLA over £46,000. If paid in full this would generate over £1,800,000 for ParkingEye.

The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 states that the act does not apply on land which is subject to statutory controls. The landowner has admitted that the statutory controls exist and that they refer to parking. However, they state that they have decided not to enforce the byelaws and therefore they can use POFA 2012 instead. This is of course, twaddle. POFA 2012 does not allow the landowner discretion as to whether or not they wish to enforce byelaws. If the byelaw exists, then POFA 2012 does not apply.

Nick Ridehalge from Associated British Ports has written to John Denham MP to try and wriggle out of their failure to stop issuing tickets claiming keeper liability, and ParkingEye have acting court cases in which they have claimed keeper liability.

This post in pepipoo considers the legal arguments.

The Prankster considered there is something seriously wrong if 18,000 tickets have been issued. Associated British Ports should spend some of the £1,800,000 generated to investigate ways of improving the situation to reduce the problem. The Prankster has heard from many people who have not seen the signage in the dark, and so more signs and better illumination would seem to be a must. Better use of technology could also be investigated to see if there are ways of warning departing motorists of overstays,

Happy Parking

The Parking Prankster


  1. I understand that Parking Eye are now owned by the infamous Capita or Crapita.

    Who runs the DVLA on behalf of the Government? Is it by any chance Capita?


    2. Surely this must constitute a conflict of interests!