Thursday, 11 June 2015

ParkingEye sharp practices cost them £313.90 in set-aside judgment

This post on pepipoo details how ParkingEye's sharp practices in court ended up costing them £313.90.

ParkingEye have a habit of filing court claims if no reply is received from their letters. They do this without checking if the motorist address is correct. Of course, one very good reason that no reply is received is if they are writing to the wrong place. Once they receive a default judgment they then use a tracing agent to find the correct address, and try and enforce the judgment. The Prankster believes the correct time to use a tracing agent is before the claim is filed, not after.

In this particular case however the situation was more straightforward - the court papers did not reach the defendant in time.

ParkingEye not only failed to turn up to the set aside hearing, but also threatened the use of bailiffs, despite the set aside application being filed. They also failed to write to the court which is unusual - normally they send in a small forest opposing the set aside.

DDJ Buckley considered that PE not attending, not notifying the court, and threatening enforcement while a set aside was outstanding was vexatious and unreasonable behaviour and therefore awarded full costs under rule 27.14(g).
(g) such further costs as the court may assess by the summary procedure and order to be paid by a party who has behaved unreasonably;
These were itemised as
£155 set aside fee
£60 defendant loss of earnings
£98.90 lay representative travel and disbursements

Total = £313.90

The judgment was set aside and the defendant was ordered to file a defence by 26 June, and ParkingEye to respond by 24 July. The case would then be referred to POPLA in the first instance. If POPLA find for the defendant, then the defendant can seek extra costs pursuant to rule 27.14(g).

(Prankster Note: this seems fair because ParkingEye often file no defence at POPLA, so the defendant can claim their preparation time if they do this)

Otherwise, the case will be relisted if the defendant considers the POPLA verdict to be incorrect.

The Prankster considers ParkingEye's options to be as follows

1) Bail out now
Cost £313.90 plus £25 filing fee

2) Fight at POPLA
Cost £313.90 plus £25 filing fee
Cost of preparing a court defence
POPLA cost of £27
Cost of preparing a POPLA defence

If they lose, then they will also face paying the defendant's POPLA preparation costs.

The Prankster has not heard of any POPLA cases where ParkingEye have won post-Beavis (when a good appeal is filed), and has heard of plenty of ParkingEye losses, so assumes this is where the case will be put to bed. However, assuming ParkingEye do win and carry on to court they will then be facing further costs of around £200-£300 for their LPC Law representative.

However, The Prankster has known ParkingEye spend £1,000 on small claims cases to get £100 back, so he assumes they will carry on regardless.

Happy Parking

The Parking Prankster


  1. It will probably be stayed when it gets to POPLA pending Beavis appeal.

  2. Boot on the other foot, would the defendant be allowed such leeway?