Parking Eye Trying To Scam Drivers-Again




What do the images above all have in common? Correct,the same date.

Parking Eye and its rapacious predatory business owners are trying to scam drivers who through no fault of their own could not purchase a parking ticket on 7th October. Parking Eye use ANPR cameras in the Priory Centre Worksop to capture images of vehicles when they enter and leave the site. The cameras do not and cannot define the period of time a vehicle is parked.

On this occasion the jobsworth responsible for ANPR operations chose to ignore that the ticket machine was not working, however judging by the number of tickets issued on that day it doesn’t take a genius to work out something was wrong. The fact the ticket machine was out of order is of no concern to Parking Eye who rely on a majority of people paying a ‘Parking Charge Notice’ without protest.

Parking Eye cannot enforce the parking invoices for this particular day because it is illegal. Why? Frustration of Contract.

Legal termination of a contract due to unforeseen circumstances that (1) prevent achievement of its objectives, (2) render its performance illegal, or (3) make it practically impossible to execute. It could be caused by reasons such as an accident, change in law, fire, sickness of one of the parties, third-party interference. Frustration of a contract excuses non-performance and automatically discharges the contract except where the terms of contract override this implied legal provision. However, frustration is not acceptable as an excuse where the circumstance was foreseeable, and is not applicable to certain types of contracts such as insurance policies.

The Protection of Freedoms Act does not permit the Claimant (Parking Eye) to recover a sum greater than the parking charge on the day before a Notice to Keeper was issued. The Claimant cannot recover additional charges.

You will recall Parking Eye being slated on this blog in November last year:


The manager of the Priory Centre is David Aunins. Centre Management Office, Priory Shopping Centre, Bridge Place, Worksop. Notts. S80 1JR. He said previously that ANPR cameras  are ‘necessary for a safe shopping experience’. Using unreliable ANPR cameras in the car park to make shoppers in the main centre feel ‘safe’ is a questionable concept.

You couldn’t make this up.


Once again the sticky brown stuff is going to hit the whirly thing for Parking Eye and the landowners Columbia Threadneedle. (Threadneedle Asset Management Limited. Cannon Place, 78 Cannon Street, London, EC4N 6AG)

Do the directors of Colombia Threadneedle realise they are jointly and severally responsible for the actions of Parking Eye and its attempts to scam motorists?

Probably not but they need to take their responsibilities seriously. They are the Principal and Parking Eye is their Agent.

Principals are responsible for the actions of their Agent.

The principal is liable for acts of the agent, as long as those are those usually confided to an agent of that character. This is true even though the agent was acting outside the scope of his actual authority.

Watteau v Fenwick, [1893] 1 QB 346, Liability of Undisclosed Principal

Bring it on Parking Eye!




This entry was posted in Parish Council News. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Parking Eye Trying To Scam Drivers-Again

  1. Fraser Birkett says:

    I visited this same car park in Worksop today and this time there is a notice on the ticket machine advising the machine is out of order and drivers should use another ticket machine.
    The notice was definitely not on the machine when I visited on 7th October-as mentioned in this article.
    I also received an invoice from P/E asking me to donate £100 to their coffers-for a 50 minute shopping trip! My initial reaction was the reply given in Arkle-v-Pressdram;

    I have written to the landowners using the guidance from this blog (It’s worked before) and expect this ticket to be cancelled. If it is not cancelled Parking Eye will have the chance to explain their actions in court.
    Colombia Threadneedle and Mr.David Aunins are not on my Christmas card list.


  2. Anonymous says:

    Now operating at Aldie in dinnington


    • Watchman says:

      They have been for some time.

      I had an email from RMBC in which they admitted they did not insist on a minimum (usually 2 hours) free parking time as a condition before granting planning permission which most other local authorities do. This is further evidence of RMBC’s sloppy procedures which has given predatory parking companies like Parking Eye a licence to impose their own time limits for shoppers to park-currently 1 hour and 30 minutes at Aldi Dinnington.


  3. Veritas says:

    Well done for exposing once again the shady business model of Parking (Sp)Eye.
    I’ve lost count of the number of court cases they’ve lost despite their website saying they ‘win over 90% of all cases’. Complete rubbish of course.

    Parking Eye like to claim they have a ‘robust’ system in place to avoid tickets being issued in error but it appears that on this particular day the ‘robust’ system checking person went home early?
    The quotes and links provided in the article are powerful ammunition for anyone who wants to challenge a Parking Eye invoice issued on the day in question.

    I agree, Bring it on Parking Eye I can’t wait to see you humiliated again.


Comments are closed.