Loren Cole refused to accept the £60 parking fine from Parkingeye – and used AI to fight it
A bloke managed to overturn his parking fine and even got the car park firm to cough up £462 for the hassle, all thanks to ChatGPT. Loren Cole, 37, was slapped with a £60 penalty after parking at Two Saints Retail Park in Ormskirk, Lancashire in July 2024, despite insisting he’d paid for a three-hour ticket at 2.45pm.
Parkingeye fined him for overstaying by a mere five minutes, not realising that the clock started ticking the moment he drove in at 2.37pm. Loren claimed the payment machines were on the blink when he arrived, and it took several tries before his payment finally went through on the app.
When Parkingeye threatened to drag Loren to court over non-payment, he decided to use ChatGPT to scrutinise their letters for mistakes, such as alleging non-payment despite a successful card transaction and asserting their evidence demonstrated a violation when their own documents didn’t include photos of the payment machines.
Loren fired off an email to the court, presenting evidence like discrepancies between the signage shown on their floor plan and the actual layout of the car park, backed up by his own snaps.
Parkingeye backed off in April this year, but Loren didn’t stop there. He cleverly used ChatGPT as a ‘legal adviser’ to claim back costs – at £19 per hour. A court order dated 13 November 2025 instructed Parkingeye to pay him £462.15, including interest and fees.
Loren, a freelance chef from Preston, described the AI assistance as transformative: “It was like having a legal advisor which I didn’t think it was capable of doing that. People need to be doing this more – it’s worth everyone questioning it when you get a fine.”
He advocated for wider use of AI in challenging parking penalties: “Feed the documents to AI and get it to analyse it – more often than not, it finds a flaw in it. At some point the parking companies will probably use AI back though. I appealed it initially, but they still upheld the fine – if it was someone more vulnerable, they might just pay it.”
ChatGPT’s AI system assisted Loren in identifying weaknesses in Parkingeye’s documentation and signage that he could challenge. The technology helped him spot that Parkingeye’s evidence lacked sufficient detail regarding his vehicle’s entry and exit times in relation to the 10-minute grace period. During a return visit to the car park, he also discovered problematic signage.
READ MORE: ‘I worked with dying people for years, they all regret the same thing’READ MORE: ‘I had ringing in my ears for years – what doctors found shocked me’
He explained how the AI began identifying deficiencies in the company’s case: “It started finding holes in what they’d sent me. When they’ve submitted evidence, they said these were the signs in place saying I need to pay.”
The chef revealed how the AI spotted procedural errors: “They sent through a floor plan basically, not photos, which ChatGPT said they should have sent. So, it was writing letters for me to send back.”
Despite persistent back-and-forth correspondence, Loren found the company maintained their position: “I kept hitting a wall as anything you say they come up with another response. I wasn’t far off going to court with it. I’d phoned the court telling them of the evidence they’d provided and at that point Parkingeye backed out. I think they were trying to intimidate me and it doesn’t cost them anything to do that.”
Following Parkingeye’s discontinuation in April, Loren took the company to task to claim costs. On 21 June 2025, a judge ruled that Parkingeye was liable for Loren’s costs under CPR 38.6, following their discontinuance.
This rule states that unless the court orders otherwise, a claimant who discontinues a claim is liable for the costs incurred by the defendant up to the date of discontinuance.
As a litigant in person (LIP), Loren was entitled to claim costs at the set rate of £19 per hour. When they failed to submit a valid Points of Dispute, Loren issued them a Default Costs Certificate for £462.15.
It wasn’t until 1 December that the company paid up, after Loren issued a final enforcement warning. He stated: “I got a Default Costs Order against them.
“They went past the deadline to pay it, and I used ChatGPT to compose another letter asking them to pay and they suddenly paid it five minutes later.”
He added: “This case shows how AI can empower ordinary people to stand up to large parking companies and exposes how easily questionable evidence can be used to intimidate motorists.”
In response, a spokesperson for Parkingeye said: “Parkingeye is one of the UK’s leading parking operators, committed to delivering reliable, accessible, and fair parking services for all motorists.”
They continued: “We continually strive to improve the parking experience by implementing our innovative parking solutions that enhance convenience, prevent parking abuse and ensure space availability for every user.
“We take all motorist cases seriously and have procedures and due processes designed to ensure fairness and transparency that are adhered to.
“Parkingeye fully respects the court’s decision on costs and will continue to act in line with the British Parking Association and International Parking Community joint code of practice.”
