Daily Mail

Mum fined £185 for parking two seconds too long

She was delayed changing a nappy

- By James Tozer

a MOTHEr who overstayed her parking time by two seconds while she was changing a nappy has been landed with a £185 bill.

Liz Taylor, 33, was given the expensive surprise after using a car park managed by ParkingEye, the firm exposed by the Daily Mail for taking out thousands of county court judgements against motorists owing as little as 1p.

Miss Taylor parked her skoda Citigo at Castlegate retail Park in Huddersfie­ld while she went shopping at a Laura ashley outlet on the site. The shopping centre’s car park, monitored by number plate recognitio­n cameras, gave customers free parking for two hours.

Pharmacy technician Miss Taylor said yesterday that, having not found what she needed, she walked to stores in the town centre before returning to her car.

she claims to have been delayed from leaving the car park because her two-year-old son, Zac yates, needed his nappy changing.

as a result, she was sent an automatic notice by ParkingEye recording her arrival time as 10.44am and 19 seconds and her departure time as 12.54pm and 21 seconds. Taking into account the ten- minute grace period agreed by parking enforcemen­t firms just days before the shopping trip on October 8 last year, that meant she was a mere two seconds outside what she was permitted. The letter ordered her to pay £85, discounted to £50 if she paid within 14 days.

The mother of two from shelley, near Huddersfie­ld, appealed but was told to provide proof she had been shopping at the retail park, which she did not have.

ParkingEye said it had been unable to accept her claim to have been nappy- changing as she had no evidence. according to the firm, Miss Taylor failed to pay the fine or respond to correspond­ence. at Huddersfie­ld County Court last month she was told to pay £ 185 – more than a week’s salary on her part-time wage. ‘I don’t think it’s fair especially as I made every effort to get back and out of the car park on time,’ she said. ‘and how do you know their cameras are accurate to two seconds?’

ParkingEye said: ‘People using this car park have a responsibi­lity to make sure they do not overstay, otherwise a parking charge will become payable. If however, they feel they should not have received a charge due to mitigating circumstan­ces, we encourage people to submit an appeal.

‘The driver failed to provide any evidence that she had shopped on the site and therefore her appeal was rejected.’

a Mail investigat­ion this year into firms which were leaving families financiall­y crippled with county court judgements (CCJs) they knew nothing about highlighte­d ParkingEye’s use of the practice.

Thousands are being signed off every day without the cases being defended or heard by a judge in open court after rulings people had no chance to contest because they were sent to an old address.

ParkingEye has made more than 60,000 CCJ claims against drivers in the past three years, with its smallest judgment being for 1p. The firm was bought for £23.9million in 2014 by outsourcin­g giant Capita.

‘Are the cameras that accurate?’

 ??  ?? Appeal rejected: Liz Taylor
Appeal rejected: Liz Taylor

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom