PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

PCN - VCS in Sheffield - Soft appeal rejected
BigAlC
post Tue, 28 Apr 2015 - 11:45
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 51
Joined: 28 Apr 2015
Member No.: 76,977



Hi all,

I've joined here from MSE in the hope some legal eagles can give me a bit of a pointer regarding the appeal to the entirely "unbias" IAS board.

Here is the link to the MSE topic, but I'll copy the latest post and add some information below;

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5228413

QUOTE
So, as for the pcn. It has been issued under a code 81. "Parked in a restricted area of a car park".

As you can see from the pictures above, there is no signage to dictate that the area is restricted, neither on the floor markings or on posts. This alone makes this ticket null and void in my opinion but obviously they thought otherwise by responding on this point saying;
QUOTE
"As per the statement made by our patrol officer, your vehicle was parked in a restricted area. Specifically, they stated, "not parked in a bay or space, parked in a service bay". The signs on site clearly state, "Park correctly and only between the lines of a single marked bay". It is not unreasonable to expect motorists to check signs in situ before leaving their vehicle.
.


I think they have caught themselves out there, as he says the patrol monkey has said one thing, and their own sign says another. Please correct me if I am wrong.

It goes on to say;
QUOTE
Your vehicle was not parked in a parking bay, and the signs on site indicate that any area that is not a parking bay may not be used for parking. Accordingly, this notice was issued correctly for a breach of the Terms and Conditions displayed on site and quoted above, and the charge will therefore stand. Whilst we appreciate what you have stated in your correspondance, we must advise you that it is the landower's decision whether or not to have lines warning motorists. As the signage in the car park is deemed as adequate, there is no need for lines warning motorists as well.

Personally, I still think this is rubbish. Again though if anyone can enlighten me that would be wonderful.

I also pulled up the charge amount and questioned its value, here is the response;

QUOTE
We note your comments in relation to the amount of our PCN charges and we can confirm that they represent a sum for liquidated and ascertained damages in respect of a breach of the "parking contract". Those charges have been calculated in advance and were clearly set out on the signage. When a motorist parks in breach of the terms and conditions of parking, a loss is incurred by us as incorrect parking prevents the efficient management of the car park. If we are unable to regulate the car park, our clients would not require our services and the company would cease to exist. It is therefore justifiable that the operator seeks to enforce its terms and conditions.


I will be sending another letter to them today, asking for a fully compliant VAT invoice to be sent to me with a breakdown of all charges applied to create the £100 charge. We shall see what they say.


So I will have a look for a template, unless someone wishes to provide something which might stand a chance of getting the PCN thrown out?

It will basically be along the same lines as my original appeal of contravention did not occur due to lack of restricted area signage and ergo lack of signage stipulating where restricted areas are and disproportional charges.

I understand that once this letter is fired off, unless I get a court order or similar I simply ignore further letters, although there is an option to deny the "collection agency" and refer them back to VCS.

Oh as a side note, I'll be getting a witness statement from one of the business owners to add ammo to my rebuttle.

Cheers for any help anyone can offer. I realise it's a mammoth first post and I've probably left loads out, but please ask any questions you need answering.

Al.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
5 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Tue, 28 Apr 2015 - 11:45
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Frustratedtobits
post Tue, 28 Apr 2015 - 12:42
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 55
Joined: 13 Feb 2015
Member No.: 75,715



You won't get anywhere with these leeches they will most likely just pass you on to ZZPS who are even more useless, take a look at my posts and others regarding ZZPS and Wright Hassall.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BigAlC
post Tue, 28 Apr 2015 - 13:01
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 51
Joined: 28 Apr 2015
Member No.: 76,977



I don't doubt I will, seeing as the IPC and IAS are basically the same company (owned by same directors IIRC).

I've had a read through your threads, but you appeared to be at a more advanced stage than I was. So there is a slim chance I can get mine thrown out.

However, in order to show I won't bend over, I need to create a solid argument regarding my stance and why what they are doing is illegal and unenforceable. That way I know that when I start getting the demands for payment I can ignore them in good conscience and will have a stronger case should I ever get called to court.

This post has been edited by BigAlC: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 - 13:02
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Tue, 28 Apr 2015 - 13:32
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,710
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



VAT isnt payable on damages, so that wont fly. If they were trying to claim contractual charge, not loss for breach of contract, then VAT would be payable.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BigAlC
post Tue, 28 Apr 2015 - 13:55
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 51
Joined: 28 Apr 2015
Member No.: 76,977



Ok, good to know. I'll throw that request letter then.

Is there anything you can advise that I should pay particular attention to given what I've included so far? I'll draft the fisrt version of the IAS appeal letter tonight and upload it later for appraisal.

Thanks.

Al.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BigAlC
post Wed, 29 Apr 2015 - 07:20
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 51
Joined: 28 Apr 2015
Member No.: 76,977



[attachment=34900:1st_stage_appeal.jpg]

For information - The initial appeal letter.

I assume I've ruined the chance of appealing under POFA reasons?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
numanoids
post Wed, 29 Apr 2015 - 07:41
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 530
Joined: 30 Jun 2014
Member No.: 71,573



you havent posted a copy of the notice so we can't say if its POFA compliant or not. Did they issue a windscreen ticket at all? Your appeal doesn't make any representations as to who YOU are so they may claim reasonable assumption that you were the driver particularly as you say "me", "i" and go on about the signage.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BigAlC
post Wed, 29 Apr 2015 - 08:03
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 51
Joined: 28 Apr 2015
Member No.: 76,977



Apologies, all I have at the moment is the one that was affixed to the screen.

Uploaded below with appeal rejection letter.

[attachment=34903:screen_pcn.jpg]

[attachment=34901:appeal_r...tion_pg1.jpg]
[attachment=34902:appeal_r...tion_pg2.jpg]

Thanks in advance,

Al.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
numanoids
post Wed, 29 Apr 2015 - 08:10
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 530
Joined: 30 Jun 2014
Member No.: 71,573



Unless you know the timescales of between the windscreen notice being issued and the first letter (including contents) its still impossible to say whether POFA compliant or not.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
emanresu
post Wed, 29 Apr 2015 - 08:11
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11,022
Joined: 24 Aug 2007
From: Home alone
Member No.: 13,324



Good to know they are claiming GPEOL. It wont win at the IPC but it will be a major stumbling block later.


--------------------
Where there is a claim - there is a counterclaim.
Are Parking companies misusing your personal data or interfering with your lease? Counterclaims are only £25. Makes them sit up and take notice. For leaseholds, join in the Managing agents too. Since the purpose of these claims is to frighten you, give them something to be frightened of.
Subject Access Requests to the DVLA?Find out who accessed your data and when. Try SubjectAccess.Requests@dvla.gsi.gov.uk. [Apologies if it does not work]
Double Dip / ANPR FaultsThe BPA Report on ANPR Double Dips is here. Ideal case for a counterclaim (see above).
Printing and posting Witness Statements. Easy and cheap way DoxDirect
What is court like. A District Judge's view
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Wed, 29 Apr 2015 - 08:15
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,710
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



POFA is mostly a non starter, looks like the ID of the driver was revealed.

The IAS are a sham, as under their appeals system you have to prove everything - however this is clearly a Breach of Contract situation and they prefer contractual charge, so you have a chance. If you want to win here, you would need to prove that e.g. the charge is unconscionable - for example if a local car park charges £25 for over staying, then £100 is clearly disprorionate. You cannot simply assert - they will seize upon this and refuse the appeal.

However, youre mostly writing this appeal for a court to see - put across everything that is valid, and shows you as being reasonable.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BigAlC
post Wed, 29 Apr 2015 - 08:17
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 51
Joined: 28 Apr 2015
Member No.: 76,977



QUOTE (numanoids @ Wed, 29 Apr 2015 - 09:10) *
Unless you know the timescales of between the windscreen notice being issued and the first letter (including contents) its still impossible to say whether POFA compliant or not.


Officially I haven't received a NTK. I appealed sooner rather than later and risk missing the deadline date. Admittedly that might be jumping the gun a little.

I got the notice on the 10-3-15 and sent appeal letter on the 25-03-15. Response of rejection of appeal was received by me on the 25-04-15 (despite date on letter being 23-04-14 - which is the 21 days I am working from)

I'm drafting an appeal to IPC (IAS) based heavily on the GPEOL aspect at the moment, but will also be looking to cite something about areas of restriction not being clearly marked.

Al.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
numanoids
post Wed, 29 Apr 2015 - 08:25
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 530
Joined: 30 Jun 2014
Member No.: 71,573



Right well you're definitely not going to get anywhere with POFA as thats for Notices to keeper only.

IAS will find in favour of the PPC so you may want to rethink whether or not you actually do appeal anyway as you may give them the points you later rely on if VCS attempt it at court.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BigAlC
post Wed, 29 Apr 2015 - 09:25
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 51
Joined: 28 Apr 2015
Member No.: 76,977



Just for clarity, you are not suggesting that I should just cough up, but rather not bother appealing to the IAS at all?

Should I get called to court after the bombardment of debt collectors letters, will this not go against me as I have not provided any proof of "willingness" to negotiate?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Wed, 29 Apr 2015 - 10:14
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,710
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



We're not telling you to pay up. We're not saying you have to negotiate. There is no common ground - you owe nothing.

We're saying that the merits of engaging with a known-sham appeals service, whcih turns ALL doctrine on how these systems should work on its head, are quite low.

If you engage, and they almost certainly reject, then a court may find that rejection persuasive - you will have to show how they are a sham (anonymous assessors, the close ties proving non independence, the requirement that the person challenging has to provide proof of everything, a legal nonsense, etc) in order to show how this can be disregarded. Additionally, by engaging you let them know exqatly your points, when the supposeduly independent Gladstones then file with small claims.

The advantage is as you say - you can look more reasonable.

If you dont engage, none of this applies, and you can simply state that you do not feel ADR will be suitable, given the public record nature of the IAS, andlet them know you will not pay anything to them, until a court orders it, and to not waste time with debt collectors. Give them 28 days to lay papers, oryou will consider the matter closed. Any action taken after this time will be considered unreasonable
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BigAlC
post Wed, 29 Apr 2015 - 11:46
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 51
Joined: 28 Apr 2015
Member No.: 76,977



That's how I understood it, thanks for confirming.

I'm still writing this appeals letter, and will stick a screenshot on of what I'm saying.

However, again just so that I understand, the recommendation is that I respond back to VCS stating the above.

I'll then bank the document I am creating, and have to obtain information regarding close ties, guilty until proven innocent etc.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Wed, 29 Apr 2015 - 11:55
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,710
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



If you're appealing to the IAS, then dont also write to the PPC. there is no point as you will have appealed to the IAS.

Think about it logically: in appealing to the IAS you are still saying you might pay up, dpeending on their verdict. You wont, as when they reject it will be having followed a sham of a process, but you are implicitly accepting their verdict to have some weight. 0, but thats still something

Hence saying you can just shortcut the process by directly stating to the PPC that they get nothing unless a court orders otherwise. Its a put up or shut up, and so carries risk - you may goad them into action.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BigAlC
post Wed, 29 Apr 2015 - 12:18
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 51
Joined: 28 Apr 2015
Member No.: 76,977



Ok, well a decision to be made then.....

Here is the IAS appeal letter I've been working on.

PAGE1 PAGE2
[attachment=34909:IAS_appe...docx_pg1.jpg][attachment=34910:IAS_appe...docx_pg2.
jpg]
PAGE3 PAGE4
[attachment=34911:IAS_appe...docx_pg3.jpg][attachment=34912:IAS_appe...docx_pg4.
jpg]

views welcome.... I admittedly got a little lost and keyboard tired at the end.

This post has been edited by BigAlC: Wed, 29 Apr 2015 - 12:19
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Wed, 29 Apr 2015 - 12:35
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,710
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



a) While its a good point, and made well, that their alleged contravention does not match their appeal, the IAS wont care. They will have to say YOU Will have to prove it is not a GPEOL. Of course, impossible to do, but thats why the IAS are a scam and a sham of an appeals body.

Expect them to seize on this, as they wont care what was in your appeal

b) Similarly they will say you have to prove there is no contract, or that as the IPC "audits" this regularly, that there is assumed to be one.

c) the ticket cannot have been issued "illegally", this is a nonsense. It can be issued without sufficient backing, of course. Again, they will say parking outside of a bay is the same as parking ina restricted area, no luck. You need to provide photos showing how what they allege and what happened dont line up.

Even if you do all of that, they will likely still dismiss it.

d) Have you submitted proof of this? Expect the PPC to claim the signage is fine, and compliant. You will have to prove it isnt.

You have included the "drop hands" nonsense - irrelevant to the IPC, you cannot cancel a contract with them. That template from MSE is horrid....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BigAlC
post Wed, 29 Apr 2015 - 13:07
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 51
Joined: 28 Apr 2015
Member No.: 76,977



QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Wed, 29 Apr 2015 - 13:35) *
a) While its a good point, and made well, that their alleged contravention does not match their appeal, the IAS wont care. They will have to say YOU Will have to prove it is not a GPEOL. Of course, impossible to do, but thats why the IAS are a scam and a sham of an appeals body.

Expect them to seize on this, as they wont care what was in your appeal

b) Similarly they will say you have to prove there is no contract, or that as the IPC "audits" this regularly, that there is assumed to be one.


Fair enough, well it appears as you say that I cannot really do much more for these points.

QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Wed, 29 Apr 2015 - 13:35) *
c) the ticket cannot have been issued "illegally", this is a nonsense. It can be issued without sufficient backing, of course. Again, they will say parking outside of a bay is the same as parking ina restricted area, no luck. You need to provide photos showing how what they allege and what happened dont line up.

Even if you do all of that, they will likely still dismiss it.


I have pictures of the area the car was parked in, which show there are neither bays or restricted signs / markings in place. (I think I've uploaded them to the MSE thread - found them)




QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Wed, 29 Apr 2015 - 13:35) *
d) Have you submitted proof of this? Expect the PPC to claim the signage is fine, and compliant. You will have to prove it isnt.

You have included the "drop hands" nonsense - irrelevant to the IPC, you cannot cancel a contract with them. That template from MSE is horrid....


Fair point, I thought some of those claims would be a bit non-sensical but was worth a mention. I'll delete the drop hands part.

In regard to signage, here is one of said signs.


I am 6ft5, and the bottom of the sign is in line with my nose give or take. What i do intend on doing on Friday is going with a tape measure and taking some measurements to see where the relevant bits of sign start, and where the top finishes. Obviously I will take some pictures to confirm.

thanks for your time regarding this by the way.

To all intents and purposes it seems easier to just ignore it now and hope it goes away, as I don't want to risk the straight to court option.

I'll still be getting a witness statement from one of the business owners regarding the matter.

Thanks,

Al.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

5 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Sunday, 16th December 2018 - 14:00
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.