IPC Appeal Dilemma

TwoPence · 6 November 2017 at 10:04PM

Hi all!

Regretfully this matter is still ongoing and seems to yield little progress over a long period of time.

An email was sent to David Dunford as recommended, who did respond asking for some additional information and whether I would like the DVLA to refer the case to the IPC on my behalf.

More recently, I have received some correspondence from the PPC's in-house legal department. I was told that 'all proceedings have been put on hold as we try to resolve this matter'. They also requested to forward the case to an 'independent adjudicator'.

At present, I have responded and explained that I would like to await a response from the DVLA. I understand that the PPC's don't wait around forever, so would appreciate any suggestions on what actions to take next and what to do in the meantime.

Grateful as always of any response,
Thanks in advance!

Coupon-mad · 6 November 2017 at 10:25PM

They also requested to forward the case to an 'independent adjudicator'.

Ask David Dunford why the PPC appear to have tried to steer a complaint to him about an AOS firm going straight to LBCCC, in the direction of the (well-reported as kangaroo court) IAS. Say you were waiting for the IPC to look into the complaint, not to be patronised with the useless IAS where it is in the public domain that most consumer 'appeals' go there to die.

Attach a copy of this Blog and say you know he is familiar with the well-supported view that the IAS is not fit for purpose:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/11/ipc-kangaroo-court-strikes-again.html

Ans ask for a copy of the response to the complaint from the IPC itself, and confirmation that of course the LBCCC is void because it was premature and is now outdated by the change in pre-action protocol for debt claims, anyway.

Ask him for the DVLA's view on the Directors shared between the IPC and Gladstones Solicitors and why the DVLA continues to allow this farce to be played out, to the detriment of registered keepers who entrust their data to the DVLA.

TwoPence · 6 November 2017 at 11:38PM

Your response is much appreciated Coupon-mad.

I'm afraid I may have caused some confusion in relation to the complaint. I assume by 'steer a complaint', you are inferring that their poor conduct resulted in me making a complaint to the DVLA regarding the non-compliance of the AOS member?

Regarding the IAS, it does not seem this is the 'independent adjudicator' that they are referring to. I had assumed such, but I was corrected:

We would in no way act on your behalf and would not be the ones to forward your matter to the Independent Appeals Service, if you were to take this option.

Unfortunatly, much of the email from the PPC representitive is ambiguous and fails to identify who the 'independent adjudicator' is, or how the process works. I have responded with an email requesting that any information regarding the 'independent adjudicator' or process is made available.

Would the PPC's non-compliance with the AOS code of practice result in their claim being void?

Ask him for the DVLA's view on the Directors shared between the IPC and Gladstones Solicitors and why the DVLA continues to allow this farce to be played out, to the detriment of registered keepers who entrust their data to the DVLA.

Very interesting points you raise. I would certainly wish to raise this with him once I have received further information regarding my complaint.

TwoPence · 7 November 2017 at 7:48PM

I have received an update from David Dunford. On the topic of reviewing a breach of the KADOE contract, here is the response:

DVLA would be unable to comment on whether there has been a breach of the code of practice as this is a matter for the IPC to investigate. If the company were proven to have breached the code of practice, the agency could then consider whether there is any action needed to be taken.

I assume at this point, I respond with the points raised by Coupon-mad in relation to the directors shared between the IPC and Gladstones Solicitors, explaining that it is in the interests of the IPC to reject any allegations in respect of its members breaching the code of conduct?

If it was concluded that the PPC did breach the code of conduct, and consequently obtained the registered keeper data without 'reasonable cause', am I correct in thinking that this would leave them with no option but to terminate legal proceedings for my parking charge?

Coupon-mad · 7 November 2017 at 8:17PM

Would the PPC's non-compliance with the AOS code of practice result in their claim being void?

No.

And they do mean the IAS, all they mean is THEY wouldn't appeal ''on your behalf''; they are trying to persuade you there is an independent option. There is NOT. I guess it is the non-standard ADR they've offered, that the NEWBIES thread tells you NEVER EVER to touch.

TwoPence · 7 November 2017 at 10:13PM

Thanks for the information. It would seem then that I am barking up the wrong tree. I had hoped that a non-compliance with the AOS would form a fundamental part of my case.

It would seem then, that the next step would be to confirm with the PPC that the LBCCC is void due to it being premature and outdated by the change in pre-action protocol for debt claims as you have mentioned in both this thread and the newbies thread.

Following the advice of the newbies thread, I should refuse the IAS on the basis that it is not fit for purpose, and explain that there will be no further correspondence until a genuine LBCCC or offer of Alternative Dispute Resolution is received?

Coupon-mad · 7 November 2017 at 10:17PM

Yup, sounds like a plan. Non-compliance with the AOS is worth a mention in defence but isn't pivotal.

But these cases are won at claims defence/hearing stage, and we help posters win 99% of cases. A life experience:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5676834

Jordan enjoyed his case today! One of HUNDREDS of winners here, and he got his costs/wages and parking fee (ironic!) back from the PPC as the Judge ordered it when chucking the case out this morning. Only two lost in 2017 that I can recall.

Umkomaas · 7 November 2017 at 10:17PM

I have received an update from David Dunford. On the topic of reviewing a breach of the KADOE contract, here is the response:

The IPC Code of Practice has nothing to do with the KADOE contract. The KADOE contract is one exchanged between the DVLA and the PPC - precisely within DD’s domain.

Is this what he said in the context of KADOE?

TwoPence · 7 November 2017 at 11:20PM

Excellent, I will proceed with this course of action.

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Jordan enjoyed his case today! One of HUNDREDS of winners here

Always encouraging to read about the successful cases. I acknowledge the excellent work that yourself and other members of this forum do to help others with their cases. A fantastic result!

Umkomaas wrote: »

The IPC Code of Practice has nothing to do with the KADOE contract. The KADOE contract is one exchanged between the DVLA and the PPC - precisely within DD’s domain.

This was in relation to a point I made considering whether or not the PPC accessed the registered keeper details with 'reasonable cause'. In order for the DVLA to provide data regarding the Keeper of a Vehicle, the KADOE contract states that:

A6.1. The Customer shall at all times be a member of a DVLA Accredited Trade Association (“ATA”) and maintain membership of the ATA and comply with the ATA’s Code of Practice or Conduct

Due to non-compliance of the code of practice from the PPC, my complaint was that the PPC had requested such data from the DVLA without reasonable cause and had not allowed me to exercise my right to appeal.

Please correct me if I have interpreted this incorrectly.

TwoPence · 10 January 2018 at 9:30PM

So, it would seem that this matter is finally over. Although I have not received explicit written confirmation, I am hopeful that I have been able to prove my point to the PPC regarding the unfair parking charge. After many months of being issued the PPC, and half a dozen automated letters later, the PPC finally assigned a human to contact me in an attempt to resolve the dispute.

After a few emails back and forth, I have received no response to my last correspondence sent via email over 2 months ago. This is significant as prior to this, the recipient of the email responded within a few hours. The most recent point I made to them was related to the post above:

TwoPence wrote: »

Following the advice of the newbies thread, I should refuse the IAS on the basis that it is not fit for purpose, and explain that there will be no further correspondence until a genuine LBCCC or offer of Alternative Dispute Resolution is received?

Unfortunately, there is no concrete evidence of the outcome of the matter as of yet. No news is good news, so they say.

This is a great opportunity to express my thanks to the members of this community, notably Umkomaas and Coupon-mad, who dedicate their time and efforts to helping those receiving unfair parking charges. The input from the community has proved invaluable, and certainly provided me with the advice and confidence to fight back against the injustice.

Hopefully this is in fact the end of the dispute. Many thanks once again to all those who contributed.

IPC Appeal Dilemma

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free