DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 121529--------------------------------------------------
Parking Eye - no return within 1 Hour
DIR By: DRG1972
Date: June 11, 2026, 4:41 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hello
I received letter from parkingeye for returning to car park
within one hour
I found this,
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/parkingeye-lidl-ilford/<br
/>
Letter is for the same car park.
We did did not shop at either the Lidl or the Farmfoods so
cannot approach either of these stores to request cancellation
of the ticket as the OP in the above post did, and as didnt shop
there dont have a receipt to supply PE with..
Because of this not sure how to proceed.
Any advice
#Post#: 121540--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye - no return within 1 Hour
DIR By: InterCity125
Date: June 12, 2026, 2:02 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Please post up the PCN covering only personal info.
#Post#: 121542--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye - no return within 1 Hour
DIR By: DrSatan
Date: June 12, 2026, 2:15 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Was it the same driver on both occasions? Parking companies like
to pretend that a vehicle can form a contract (it can't), so if
it was a different driver you have a slam dunk defence.
#Post#: 121549--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye - no return within 1 Hour
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: June 12, 2026, 3:29 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote ---
> if it was a different driver you have a slam dunk defence
--- End Quote ---
Even if it wasn't, I struggle to see how the parking company
would prove this.
A minor point to add, County Court judges and 'slam dunk
defence' don't often go hand in hand.
#Post#: 121554--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye - no return within 1 Hour
DIR By: Dave65
Date: June 12, 2026, 4:19 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Just make sure that the truth is used about driver/drivers.
#Post#: 121555--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye - no return within 1 Hour
DIR By: InterCity125
Date: June 12, 2026, 4:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Dave65 link ---
>
> Just make sure that the truth is used about driver/drivers.
>
--- End Quote ---
There's no requirement to reveal driver details.
This makes it difficult for the operator to pursue a 'no return'
PCN as they have to prove that it was the same driver on each
occasion which is obviously very difficult.
#Post#: 121559--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye - no return within 1 Hour
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: June 12, 2026, 4:46 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: InterCity125 link ---
>
> [quote author=Dave65 link=topic=11134.msg121554#msg121554
date=1781255981]
> Just make sure that the truth is used about driver/drivers.
>
--- End Quote ---
There's no requirement to reveal driver details.
[/quote]
I don't think that Dave's post suggests otherwise. There's an
important difference between not sharing information you are not
obliged to, and being dishonest about the circumstances.
#Post#: 121572--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye - no return within 1 Hour
DIR By: ixxy
Date: June 12, 2026, 5:48 am
---------------------------------------------------------
However if the PCN is POFA compliant and the 2 different drivers
are not named they could go after the keeper. Possibly the one
time it is worth naming the drivers if they were actually
different?
#Post#: 121577--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye - no return within 1 Hour
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: June 12, 2026, 6:17 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: ixxy link ---
>
> However if the PCN is POFA compliant and the 2 different
drivers are not named they could go after the keeper.
>
--- End Quote ---
What would they go after the keeper for?
#Post#: 121584--------------------------------------------------
Re: Parking Eye - no return within 1 Hour
DIR By: InterCity125
Date: June 12, 2026, 6:44 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: ixxy link ---
>
> However if the PCN is POFA compliant and the 2 different
drivers are not named they could go after the keeper. Possibly
the one time it is worth naming the drivers if they were
actually different?
>
--- End Quote ---
It's a valid question.
I'm not sure that the OP has said that it was or wasn't two
different drivers.
But yes, they could go after the RK using either PoFA or
'reasonable assumption' but they would still have to prove their
case at IAS / POPLA and then at Court if they went that far.
Obviously, when a driver enters a car park it is the driver who
forms the contract with the operator - critically no contract is
ever formed directly with the RK.
So the operator could use PoFA to move liability to the RK but
they would have to prove that the contravention occurred when
the SAME driver entered for the second time.
PoFA does not remove the requirement that the operator must
prove that the contravention occurred in the first instance -
and that is the bit which they would struggle to prove.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 3
DIR Next Page