Have you taken a private parking ticket appeal to the Independent Parking Committee?

Hello,

Following the advice on these forums WRT dealing with G24, who have rejected my appeal to a ticket and IAS also rejecting an appeal I am posting the IAS response, :
The Appellant raises various grounds of appeal which I will deal with in the order it appears in the correspondence.

1. Excessive charge

The Operator does not pursue the Parking Charge following a breach of contract. The Parking Charge has been issued pursuant to a specific contractual term and therefore the question of loss is not a relevant consideration for this appeal.

For further guidance on this point the Appellant may wish to consider the judgment in PARKINGEYE LIMITED and BARRY BEAVIS [2015] EWCA Civ 402

2. Signs not seen

As keeper of the vehicle how can the Appellant know what was or was not seen by the driver? I have seen photographic images of the signage which exists on the site and am satisfied to the required standard that the signage on site was sufficient and that the Appellant was made reasonably aware of the terms contained within these signs. The Appellant chose to park on private land and must therefore abid e by the terms of parking on this private land.

3. Proprietary interest

This site has been audited by the IPC and a copy of the landowner’s authority has been provided to them as part of the audit process. In this appeal procedure the onus this is on the Appellant to prove their case on the balance of probabilities. I am satisfied from the evidence provided that that the Operator has the authority to issue Parking Charge Notices on this site.

It is worth noting on this point, more recent case law is provided by the decision of the Court of Appeal in Vehicle Control Services (VCS) v. HMRC [2013] EWCA Civ 186, para, 22 per Lewison LJ. In this case the contract between VCS and the landowner gave VCS the right to eject trespassers. That is plain from the fact that it is entitled to tow away vehicles that infringe the terms of parking. The contract between VCS and the motorist gives VCS the same right. Given that the motorist has accepted a permit on terms that if the conditions are broken his car is liable to be towed away, it would be open to a motorist to deny that VCS has the right to do that which the contract says it can. In order to vindicate those rights, it is necessary for VCS to have the right to sue in trespass. If, instead of towing away a vehicle, VCS imposes a parking charge there is no impediment to regarding that as damages for trespass.

4. Breach of PoFA

The Appellant raises this ground but fails to specify why the notice breaches PoFA. From the dates provided I am satisfied that the correspondence is in order.

5. No contract

I am satisfied that a contract has been formed in this instance. If the Appellant, on considering the terms, was not happy to accept them, because they felt they were unreasonable, they did not have to accept them. The Appellant had the option to park elsewhere, or they could accept the terms and abide by the maximum stay limits, or to overstay and agree to pay the charge. They chose the last option.

For the reasons stated above, this appeal I dismissed.

Now do I ignore and risk court action as per the MSE news article here (unable to post link from these forums) private-parking-fines-judges-rule-against-motorists, or pay?

Please could you advise, many thanks.