The Sunday Post (Newcastle)

Archie fought back and beat the parking ‘fine’

- By Steve Finan rawdeal@sundaypost.com

LAST week we told you about ParkingEye, who refused to listen to the mitigating circumstan­ces of a man who used their car park.

Alan Redpath, of Bannockbur­n, had been driving all night and stopped, as the Government advises, to take a break from long distances.

He napped for 51 minutes too long in a motorway services car park and is being threatened with debt collectors over the £100 ParkingEye reckons he should pay.

Raw Deal couldn’t get them to change their mind about that, but this week we have had more success.

Archie Telford, of Edinburgh, and his wife Mary, had a wee break in Blackpool last year, just four days in September to see the illuminati­ons and relax.

The hotel they stayed in has a car park which is run by ParkingEye.

However, guests at the hotel, the Britannia Metropole, get a special deal of £3 a day, which is decent value for the area near the North Pier.

The holiday went well, Archie and Mary returned home – then a demand for payment of a £100 “fine” arrived.

But this wasn’t right, what about the hotel’s deal with the parking firm?

Archie sent various letters and emails to ParkingEye and was eventually, in February this year, sent a letter confirming this £100 “fine” didn’t apply. Quite right too. But last month another claim arrived. What was going on? Why was this charge being re-applied when Archie had, in writing, confirmati­on that it had been cancelled?

This letter was quite threatenin­g, telling of court action that was about to be started.

Archie wrote to Raw Deal and we contacted ParkingEye.

Archie is happy that his charge has been re-thought.

It had a think about the circumstan­ces then sent Archie another letter.

This one again confirmed he needn’t pay the Blackpool “fine”, but also contained a confusing paragraph saying: “To avoid potential future inconvenie­nce, we would kindly request you follow the parking terms and conditions displayed on the signage throughout the car park.”

We are slightly perplexed as to what “potential inconvenie­nce” might mean when Archie was allowed, with his hotel pass, to park in the hotel’s car park.

But at least ParkingEye have thought better of their letters telling of debt collectors and court proceeding­s.

If you have been wrongly charged by one of these parking firms, then challenge it. Don’t just give in and pay up.

Assert your rights and fight them all the way.

 ??  ?? n
n

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom