Author Topic: ParkingEye lose at POPLA again  (Read 4983 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ewan Hoosami

  • Administrator
  • Follower
  • *****
  • Posts: 2227
  • Veni, Vidi, $chunti. I came, I saw, I assisted.
ParkingEye lose at POPLA again
« on: 18 April, 2014, 06:15:15 PM »
The cheeky little scamps at ParkingEye were wondering if Mrs. Hoosami's cousin would like to hand £85 over to them for no particular reason. I countered their kind offer by suggesting that they might like to pay £27+VAT for an impressive looking GPEOL defence. I didn't let on to them that they could have gone onto the Parking Prankster's blog and got the same thing completely free of charge. They coughed up and supplied a POPLA code and were so impressed with the defence that they didn't even bother to send in any evidence themselves, resulting in a default judgement.

The VAT on the POPLA fee goes directly to the exchequer and funds some of our excellent MPs like Eric Pickles and Brandon Lewis by way of example. Therefore ParkingEye are, in a roundabout way, sticking their fingers up at the BPA Ltd and helping to get CCTV banned. See, they're not such bad eggs after all.

Appealing to the council is like playing chess with a pigeon. You might be a chess grand master but the pigeon will always knock all the pieces over, shit on the board and then strut around triumphantly.

Offline The Bald Eagle

  • Administrator
  • Follower
  • *****
  • Posts: 4445
  • THE lowest common denominator
Re: ParkingEye lose at POPLA again
« Reply #1 on: 18 April, 2014, 07:27:53 PM »
Would be interested in seeing the assessor's reasons. ;D
WE ARE WATCHING YOU

Offline Ewan Hoosami

  • Administrator
  • Follower
  • *****
  • Posts: 2227
  • Veni, Vidi, $chunti. I came, I saw, I assisted.
Re: ParkingEye lose at POPLA again
« Reply #2 on: 18 April, 2014, 07:44:38 PM »
Short and sweet was the order of the day on this one.

Reasons for the Assessor’s Determination
It is the Appellant’s case that the parking charge notice was issued incorrectly.

The Operator has not produced a copy of the parking charge notice, nor any evidence to show a breach of the conditions of parking occurred, nor any evidence that shows what the conditions of parking, in fact, were.

Accordingly I have no option but to allow the appeal.

Shehla Pirwany
Assessor


We never said that the parking charge was issued incorrectly. We submitted a robust GPEOL defence supported by a locus standi argument and a piece on signage. It seems that POPLA no longer want to admit that GPEOL is an unbeatable hand in parking poker. I have alerted the Prankster so we will see how this develops.
Appealing to the council is like playing chess with a pigeon. You might be a chess grand master but the pigeon will always knock all the pieces over, shit on the board and then strut around triumphantly.

Offline «THÖMÅS®©™»

  • Follower
  • **
  • Posts: 115
    • Dohlman.net
Re: ParkingEye lose at POPLA again
« Reply #3 on: 18 April, 2014, 08:58:50 PM »
Good game.  Get those wea$els good!
It's not "enforcement", it's "extortionate"!

Offline Ewan Hoosami

  • Administrator
  • Follower
  • *****
  • Posts: 2227
  • Veni, Vidi, $chunti. I came, I saw, I assisted.
Re: ParkingEye lose at POPLA again
« Reply #4 on: 25 April, 2014, 08:51:56 PM »
Well, OK then, if you insist. Park Direct have just ordered two copies of the Prankster's excellent GPEOL defence. (One for Mrs. Hoosami's mum and one for Mrs. Hoosami's mum's neighbour.) POPLA should be paying a commission for all this business I'm sending their way.


 :dancing:  :-ev-:  :dancing:
Appealing to the council is like playing chess with a pigeon. You might be a chess grand master but the pigeon will always knock all the pieces over, shit on the board and then strut around triumphantly.

Offline Pat Pending

  • Global Moderator
  • Follower
  • *****
  • Posts: 2504
Re: ParkingEye lose at POPLA again
« Reply #5 on: 26 April, 2014, 09:49:34 PM »
I  should have a very interesting one for Parking Eye &  Aldi soon :-ev-:
Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways - Beer in one hand - chocolate in the other - body thoroughly used up,  totally worn out and screaming "WOO-HOO, what a  ride!!"

Offline «THÖMÅS®©™»

  • Follower
  • **
  • Posts: 115
    • Dohlman.net
Re: ParkingEye lose at POPLA again
« Reply #6 on: 28 April, 2014, 08:09:29 AM »
Punk Extortionists are nothing more than scam artists!

I cannot say that enough, if I got one of thier fake fines, I would completely ignore it.
It's not "enforcement", it's "extortionate"!

Offline The Bald Eagle

  • Administrator
  • Follower
  • *****
  • Posts: 4445
  • THE lowest common denominator
Re: ParkingEye lose at POPLA again
« Reply #7 on: 28 April, 2014, 12:51:57 PM »
Punk Extortionists are nothing more than scam artists!

I cannot say that enough, if I got one of thier fake fines, I would completely ignore it.

If you ignored it you would be playing right into their hands and would find yourself having a default judgment made against you in the small claims court, which would most likely see bailiffs knocking on your door at a later date.

Much better to go the Parking Prankster route. ;)
WE ARE WATCHING YOU

Offline «THÖMÅS®©™»

  • Follower
  • **
  • Posts: 115
    • Dohlman.net
Re: ParkingEye lose at POPLA again
« Reply #8 on: 28 April, 2014, 01:51:00 PM »
I would till the Court papers arrived!

Then I would say that the claim is scandalous, vexatious, frivolous and an abuse of the court and ask the court to strike out the claim pursuant to CPR part 33.4.

Then they would be screwed!

Then I would tell the bailiffs to sling thier hook and leave my property before I called the police for trespass and intimidation along with threatening behaviour.

I know my rights and I take reasonable and strong steps to protect them.  Everyone should.
It's not "enforcement", it's "extortionate"!

Offline Ewan Hoosami

  • Administrator
  • Follower
  • *****
  • Posts: 2227
  • Veni, Vidi, $chunti. I came, I saw, I assisted.
Re: ParkingEye lose at POPLA again
« Reply #9 on: 28 April, 2014, 03:32:39 PM »
Appealing to the council is like playing chess with a pigeon. You might be a chess grand master but the pigeon will always knock all the pieces over, shit on the board and then strut around triumphantly.

Offline «THÖMÅS®©™»

  • Follower
  • **
  • Posts: 115
    • Dohlman.net
Re: ParkingEye lose at POPLA again
« Reply #10 on: 28 April, 2014, 08:39:26 PM »
I don't understand...
It's not "enforcement", it's "extortionate"!

Offline commonlymark

  • Civilian
  • *
  • Posts: 3
Re: ParkingEye lose at POPLA again
« Reply #11 on: 04 May, 2014, 10:08:39 AM »
I've always found that the easy route with parking eye is to get my favourite big red marker pen out and write 'NOT REGOGNISED' right across it, then post it back.

The paperwork sent by the eye is an offer to enter a contract.

If it's not recognised then a contract is not valid.

An offer of a contract must be accepted in order to become valid.

There are never any signatures created by human hand on their paperwork, only an electronic copy of a signature which invalidates the offer of a contract.

A further point, is that 'parking eye' is an independent 3rd party making a claim, not the land owner or store.

If anyone should be making a claim it would be the land owner or the store...not a remote 3rd party.

Sending the paperwork back stops the commercial conveyor belt running.

Game over.









Offline Ewan Hoosami

  • Administrator
  • Follower
  • *****
  • Posts: 2227
  • Veni, Vidi, $chunti. I came, I saw, I assisted.
Re: ParkingEye lose at POPLA again
« Reply #12 on: 04 May, 2014, 10:26:58 AM »
I've heard the cat was out of the bag regarding sPeCulative iNvoicing (PCNs) as far back as roman times.

http://nutsville.com/2013/06/12/spartacus-shows-up-the-farce-of-getting-a-parking-ticket-on-private-land/

Appealing to the council is like playing chess with a pigeon. You might be a chess grand master but the pigeon will always knock all the pieces over, shit on the board and then strut around triumphantly.

Offline DastardlyDick

  • Follower
  • **
  • Posts: 1697
Re: ParkingEye lose at POPLA again
« Reply #13 on: 05 May, 2014, 04:56:03 PM »
I've always found that the easy route with parking eye is to get my favourite big red marker pen out and write 'NOT REGOGNISED' right across it, then post it back.

The paperwork sent by the eye is an offer to enter a contract.

If it's not recognised then a contract is not valid.

An offer of a contract must be accepted in order to become valid.

There are never any signatures created by human hand on their paperwork, only an electronic copy of a signature which invalidates the offer of a contract.

A further point, is that 'parking eye' is an independent 3rd party making a claim, not the land owner or store.

If anyone should be making a claim it would be the land owner or the store...not a remote 3rd party.

Sending the paperwork back stops the commercial conveyor belt running.

Game over.










This 'freeman on the land' nonsense has been totally discredited, at best it might delay the inevitable at worst you'll end up behind bars for non payment of fine and/or contempt of court.

It does not work, the only people who gain from it are the so-called 'gurus' who make lots of money by selling this rubbish to the unsuspecting.


Offline Ewan Hoosami

  • Administrator
  • Follower
  • *****
  • Posts: 2227
  • Veni, Vidi, $chunti. I came, I saw, I assisted.
Re: ParkingEye lose at POPLA again
« Reply #14 on: 06 May, 2014, 01:32:22 AM »
Well said Dick. ParkingEye love this bullshit. They simply file their huge blizzard of paperwork to the court and get a default judgement. The tried and tested route is a robust POPLA appeal which smashes the shit out of it before it even gets off the ground. The definitive guide is here,

http://www.parking-prankster.com/court-claim.html

I have a win already by using this guide and in about a months time will have two more to go with it. All the principles in this excellent guide have been properly road tested. The Prankster is not your run-of-the-mill armchair lawyer. He has gone out and deliberately got several speculative invoices. Each of the grounds mentioned have all been tested at POPLA as a single appeal ground prior to publication. Any robust appeal based on this will intimidate the operator to the extent that they will not even submit their side to POPLA.

Or you could go your own way. Let us know how you get on.

Appealing to the council is like playing chess with a pigeon. You might be a chess grand master but the pigeon will always knock all the pieces over, shit on the board and then strut around triumphantly.

 


Supporters of the NoToMob

In order to view this object you need Flash Player 9+ support!

Get Adobe Flash player