"independent" appeals service, post Oct 2012

Dublindel

A lawyer should know the law in this area anyway, especially if accepting this position. So in 99% of appeals the PPC claims should be almost automatically be struck out.

ManxRed

trisontana wrote: »

Except they are not "penalties".

Technically, they are penalties, that's one of the reasons that they are unenforceable! But I get what you are getting at!

esmerobbo

It will be interesting to see what a "Lawyer" would base their decision on?

Contract, penalty, unfair contract conditions, even before we got to the reason the invoice was issued?

bargepole

bargepole wrote: »

No need to ask any questions - just tell it like it is. This is what I've sent him:

Dear Mr Benton,

I have read your report, dated 14 June 2012, in which you are proposing to operate an Appeals Service for the BPA from October 2012.

If you do this, you will be making a terrible mistake - there is a very large elephant in the room which your document completely ignores.

The document states "the appeal service will focus on whether a parking enforcement notice has been issued lawfully."

Private Parking "tickets", by their very nature, are never lawful for the following reasons:

1) Contract law, for which the long established precedent is [FONT=&quot]Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre CoLtd v New Garage and Motor Co. Ltd (1915) AC79:[/FONT] The ruling in this case sets a long-standing precedent, and clearly establishes that penalties cannot be enforced under English contract law. If an arbitrary amount is charged, which bears no relation to any actual loss, or genuine pre-estimate of loss, then this is a penalty.


2) Vehicle Control Services (VCS) v HMRC (Upper Tier Tax Tribunal, May 2012):
[FONT=&quot]Although this case was primarily concerned with VAT liabilities, it was necessary for the Judges to make rulings on the legality of PPC contracts in order to assess those liabilities. In the matter of contracts, the rulings were very clear that if the PPC has no ownership of, or proprietary interest in, the land, they cannot lawfully create contracts with drivers, irrespective of any signage. It therefore follows that any so-called “parking charges” are unlawful and unenforceable. Virtually all PPC "tickets" are issued under similarly unlawful and unenforceable contracts.

3) Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999:
In particular, Schedule 2 of those Regulations gives an indicative (and non-exhaustive) list of terms which may be regarded as unfair and includes at Schedule 2(1)(e) "Terms which have the object or effect of requiring any consumer who fails to fulfil his obligation to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation." Furthermore, Regulation 5(1) states that: "A contractual term which has not been individually negotiated shall be regarded as unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer" and 5(2) states: "A term shall always be regarded as not having been individually negotiated where it has been drafted in advance and the consumer has therefore not been able to influence the substance of the term."

You may also be interested to know that, in the Impact Assessment phase leading up to the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, the BPA provided figures to the DVLA, in which they estimated that "between 2% and 5%" of private parking tickets were the subject of County Court Claims - i.e. between 36,000 and 90,000 annually.

Thanks to a Freedom of Information request to the Ministry of Justice, I was able to establish that the actual number of Court claims issued in 2011 was just 845 - of which, only a paltry 49 proceeded to a hearing.

This should tell you everything you need to know about the BPA, whose only real interest is in perpetuating the myth that their members "tickets" are lawfully issued, so that they can scare people into paying them monies to which they are not entitled.

I would urge you to ensure that the London Councils have nothing to do with this grubby little scam.

Best regards,[/FONT]

This not very enlightening reply received from Mr Benton:

Dear Mr Bargepole
Thank you for your email about the proposed new Independent Appeal Services for parking on Private Land.

I am sure the adjudicator will consider your points at some stage during the life of the service.


Stephen Benton | Programme Director, Transport & Mobility

BASFORDLAD

esmerobbo wrote: »

It will be interesting to see what a "Lawyer" would base their decision on?

Contract, penalty, unfair contract conditions, even before we got to the reason the invoice was issued?

I wonder if their remit will allow them to consider this? Or will the bpa have hamstrung this?

SodG24

BASFORDLAD wrote: »

I think it will be worth contacting Stephen Benton on a weekly basis to see if the person has been appointed and then get the contact details.

Might I suggest it would be beneficial to our cause NOT to flood his inbox - just the odd request for an update. He's a council employee and we want to encourage the councils to think how we do so let's not target him as if he had made the decisions or was a PPC employee ( who are of course fair game ).

peter_the_piper

bargepole wrote: »

This not very enlightening reply received from Mr Benton:

Dear Mr Bargepole
Thank you for your email about the proposed new Independent Appeal Services for parking on Private Land.

I am sure the adjudicator will consider your points at some stage during the life of the service.


Stephen Benton | Programme Director, Transport & Mobility

snap.........

BASFORDLAD

SodG24 wrote: »

Might I suggest it would be beneficial to our cause NOT to flood his inbox - just the odd request for an update. He's a council employee and we want to encourage the councils to think how we do so let's not target him as if he had made the decisions or was a PPC employee ( who are of course fair game ).

True but the sooner people contact him the better

BASFORDLAD

bargepole wrote: »

This not very enlightening reply received from Mr Benton:

Dear Mr Bargepole
Thank you for your email about the proposed new Independent Appeal Services for parking on Private Land.

I am sure the adjudicator will consider your points at some stage during the life of the service.


Stephen Benton | Programme Director, Transport & Mobility

That reply is awful. Thats like saying yea we will look at it sometime in the next 59 years. I would be tempted to go back and say its not good enough and these points need addressing as a matter of urgency

Kite2010

I am sure the BPA appointed adjudicator will consider your points at some point before saying nope.