The Prankster is aware of a large number of claims progressing through the courts regarding the Peel Centre. In many of these cases the motorist paid for a ticket and entered their registration correctly, but the ticket machines issued a bogus ticket with the wrong registration.
In a case previously reported by the Prankster the motorist entered their registration, but received a ticket with the letters 'QQ'.
In another case reported by the Prankster, the motorist visited the Peel centre and typed her registration but the machine gave a ticket with the letter 'P'.
In a similar case this week in a ParkingEye claim, the motorist entered their registration but got a blank ticket back - something ParkingEye claimed was impossible despite it being logged on their system.
In both these cases the judge dismissed the claim, ruling that the defendant on the balance of probabilities entered their registration correctly, and it was not their fault the software used by the parking company was buggy.
The judgment is now available on the Prankster Site in the case law section.
Please download CS033 Excel Parking v Mrs S. C8DP11F9 (Peel Centre ticket failure).
The final paragraph is reproduced here.
I am satisfied that the ticket then produced is the ticket that she has produced to the court. It was through no fault of hers that this ticket displayed the letters “QQ” instead of her registration number. She obtained a ticket. She made the payment to obtain that. She displayed that ticket. It shows the relevant time of entry. It shows the amount that she has paid and it shows the registration number that the ticket machine produced. It would have been unreasonable to expect the defendant to do anything further beyond that as far as I am concerned. The registration number is not accurately
reflected but that is through no fault on the part of the defendant and I find on the balance of probabilities that the defendant had inputted the correct registration number and she had then displayed the ticket that was issued and so to all intents and purposes had fully complied with the terms and conditions applicable to this car park. Accordingly, I am going to dismiss the claim
The Prankster hopes this transcript will be helpful to others in similar situations, and thanks the people who funded it.
There are a number of known errors with parking machines, and it is not the motorists fault when these errors occur. The Peel centre is particularly prone. It is probably the worst run car park in the whole country, as a disproportionate proportion of The Prankster's mailbag is taken up with complaints about this car park.
Happy Parking
The Parking Prankster
Putting the fun back into parking
Click for guide to fighting ParkingEye court claims
Click for help with low-cost appeals and court defences
a-peel ?
ReplyDeleteI was involved in assisting this defendant with her court documents.
ReplyDeleteThe original parking event was over two years ago, and she sent an appeal to Excel, with a photocopy of the ticket she purchased.
Any reasonable company would have seen that this was simply a machine error, and cancelled the ticket straight away. But Excel are not a reasonable company, they are a bunch of money-grabbing sharks, so the appeal was rejected, followed by several months of spurious demands from the usual dodgy 'debt' collectors.
Next, BW Legal get involved, and file court papers including a 'witness statement' full of irrelevancies, misleading assertions and ridiculous untruths. Fortunately, the Judge saw through this charade, and dismissed the claim.
It seems that the dregs of the legal profession - Gladstones and BW Legal - are now vying with each other to become the least competent and most untrustworthy solicitor firms in the country.