ParkingEye lost in court in a case reported on Consumer Action Group.
A0JD0514 Stafford Crown Court, August 2014
In this case, the motorist parked in a hotel which went into administration on the day she parked.
ParkingEye tried to keep this information from the court. When ParkingEye's advocate heard the defendant was going to tell the judge, she phoned ParkingEye for instruction. Rather than 'fessing up, ParkingEye, who knew about the situation, told the advocate to use legal reasons to prevent the judge from knowing about the situation. She tried to argue that the information should have been filed 14 days ago and stated the defendant was being 'unfair' for bringing this matter up.
However, the judge was wise to this trick and ruled that the information was pertinent to the case. (Prankster note; after all, this is not new information being sprung on ParkingEye. This is something ParkingEye already knew and were trying to keep from the court. The defendant had also written to ParkingEye back in April). The rather stuffed ParkingEye who had submitted a witness statement from the new owners and tried to sneak this past the judge. This was given the heave-ho as not being relevant, and as ParkingEye had decided not to produce any contract, this left them without any evidence that there was an agreement with the landowner and the case was thrown out.
Before the hearing started, the ParkingEye advocate tried to intimidate the defendant by showing off her massive wedge of transcripts where ParkingEye had won cases. The defendant's McKenzie friend whipped out his corresponding transcripts of cases lost by ParkingEye. The advocate was thrown off stride by this and snapped 'Where did you get these from? These are not available to someone like you.' The McKenzie friend laughed and said he could not remember. (For quick reference, they can all be found from The Prankster's web site here.)
This is typical ParkingEye behaviour; they are more than happy to quote endlessly from cases they have won, but refuse many times to provide details of cases they have lost.
ParkingEye have in a number of cases provided landowner witness statements from companies who did not have the right to offer parking at the sites in question. Often, the companies did not even exist. They have also regularly used witness statements where the information could not have been known by the witness. As ParkingEye write the witness statements and send them to the witness for signing (or in some cases just photocopy pre-signed statements) they will be completely aware the statements were not in the knowledge of the witness. Their use of such witness statements has now been completely discredited but sadly they continue to use them.
The Parking Prankster