Tuesday, 1 September 2015

ParkingEye cases presumed stayed en-masse in Barnstaple

In a further update to last weeks ParkingEye cases, The Prankster has been informed that up to 4 cases in Barnstaple were stayed until the Supreme Court judgment in the ParkingEye v Beavis case.

The first case was reported back to the Prankster as stayed, and there were another 3 cases to follow. The Prankster assumes these were all stayed as well, unless they could be dismissed on the day on other criteria.

This drops ParkingEye's apparent success rate to around 10%, instead of the 90% they are claiming. And in the one case they did win last week, enforcement was stayed until the Beavis case.

The ParkingEye legal representative was reported as looking very deflated. Still, she will have pocketed around £800, so there is no need to feel too sorry for her.

Happy Parking

The Parking Prankster


  1. Given that the 2014 figures showed PE issued 30,000 claims for the year, might it be that your straw poll is far from representative of the whole?

    Would it not be expected that those you were involved with were more likely to be stayed than those you are not?

    1. Of those 30,000 claims, only around 5% ended up in a contested court hearing.

      And out of those that went to court, PE won around 60%, not the 90% they claim on their website. (Source: FOI request to MoJ).

      Where the Prankster and others of us were involved, their success rate drops off markedly.

    2. As stated in my previous blog on this, it is possible. The few times I have rocked up as an observer, the defence has been very poor. It is also true that cases are decided on the defence presented and the skill of the advocate, not on the actual possible legal points and facts.(See the Beavis case!)

    3. I'm not sure what you mean by 'See the Beavis case', could you elaborate please?

    4. A lot of the 'information' presented by ParkingEye in that case has since proved to be false, starting with their claim it costs on average £55 per ticket issued.

  2. Spelling error Mr P. It's Barnstaple. Unless Parking Eye also scams people in America.

  3. Im due in court next week, and it hasnt been adjourned, I have just sent into court the european case. One problem I have is the contract is unreadable only around 2 pages are clear the others are all blanked out, including the locations of the said car park, how will the judge deal with that?

  4. In my case (see earlier posts) the judge commented that the blacked out sections of the contract may - for all he knew - say: 'Mr Hudson is exempt from payment and may park gleefully wherever he likes.' So you could be lucky!