Parking Eye Invoices.

  rdave13 17:10 19 Mar 2013

I know that you have to pay fines to the Police and Local Authorities. Now Parking Eye is a private company that takes an image of your vehicle entering and exiting a car park. Should be accurate but sometimes not. There are ample warning signs showing the parking time limit. My question is this, do you legally have to pay their brightly coloured, "fine" looking, invoice? The parking is privately owned.

  Pine Man 17:47 19 Mar 2013

It is a civil debt and non payment could result in bailiffs knocking on your door.

  Al94 17:51 19 Mar 2013

Have a read here

The answer is probably not.

  Al94 17:55 19 Mar 2013

My post was incomplete - probably not if the fine was in some way unfair. Read the guide carefully, Parking Eye are approved operators.

  rdave13 18:06 19 Mar 2013

Can Parking Eye legally penalize anybody by sending these invoices? Surely that should be up to the landowner to recover any losses by overstaying in the 'free parking' area (up to 3 hrs) and not up to PE to do so? They are simply agents working on behalf the retail park owners.

  rdave13 18:07 19 Mar 2013

What I mean is do they have statutory authority to do so?

  wee eddie 18:12 19 Mar 2013

rdave: I think that you can safely assume that Parking Eye are working on behalf of the Site Owners and that the legal Side has been sorted already.

However, it might be worthwhile contacting the AA and asking if they have checked Parking Eye's credentials.

As to potential inaccuracies, if you think that you can prove your point and have the necessary funds, why not go ahead and take them to Court!

  rdave13 18:24 19 Mar 2013

wee eddie , it's not me that's overstayed. I'm puzzled by your statment that one has to assume that the legal side is sorted. I can't get it around my head that a FREE service such as PE can issue invioces looking like 'fines' to customers of a retail park that overstay or sometimes re-visit the park.

  fourm member 18:46 19 Mar 2013

I'm confused by what you mean by 'a FREE service'. Al94's link is quite clear that these charges are legitimate if the charge is fair.

'Fair' might be hard to establish but common sense should be a guide. If a parking area is provided for obviously short-term purposes, like a services area or a supermarket, then it is fair for the owner to discourage longer stays with a charge.

If it is a car park then 'fair' probably needs to be judged by the going rate for the area.

'Unfair', to me, would be a charge that wasn't clearly displayed or any indication that the parking was only provided for a limited period.

I think 'fair' also should take account of other people. If a supermarket is within walking distance of a railway station it would be unfair for commuters to take the supermarket places up to avoid paying for the station car park. The supermarket, in such a case, could say a 'fair' charge is higher than the station car park after a free period.

  rdave13 19:17 19 Mar 2013

ParkingEye system supplied free of charge . Click here. That means it lives off the fines it acquires?

  fourm member 20:26 19 Mar 2013

I see. You mean it is free to the landowner.

You call it 'fines'. It could also be called 'parking charges'. As I said, the decider is whether the charges are fair.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

iMac Pro review

Why this awful City of Los Angeles job ad for a graphic designer is actually brilliant

iMac Pro review

Les meilleures prises CPL (2018)