IPC tickets.

peter_the_piper

I have yet to see any tickets/appeals regarding any of the "new" members, anyone else seen/experienced them?

Coupon-mad

No not yet. I am concerned that we need to address all the issues in an IPC appeal to test the water like we did with POPLA, this time last year.

4consumerrights

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4763499

Coupon-mad

I have just replied on that thread as I noticed the PPC only allowed 14 days to appeal. We need to get things straight in our heads so no-one misses any deadlines - and I need to update the NEWBIES sticky thread soon!

We need to study the IPC CoP in detail - must admit I have not done so. I seem to recall they say that keepers can only appeal in certain circs (not sure what) and that the OPs cannot add further evidence to an IPC appeal once it's submitted. I wonder if it says anything about submitting the same appeal to the IPC as to the PPC? Maybe no soft appeals in future for these firms, and we'll need to make sure they are done URGENTLY if there's only 14 days.

It all needs a good discussion, perhaps we can use this thread to post what we learn when we take time to study the IPC 'rules'.

4consumerrights

I have read the IPC COP when it first came out - though will need to refresh memory (several spelling mistakes were noted)

For the OP's case given in above thread #3 - I have a few specific ideas for an appeal in this case - and I hope that she returns soon with the response.
(maybe the PPC and Gladstones were deciding who was going to indemnify whom should the OP claim damages!)

You are right that no further evidence can be submitted after initial appeal. IPC specifically states that it is only on points of law - so everything and anything should be thrown at them - especially in the beginning (IMO). As I'm not sure that they consider breach of their COP as part of appeals as they state that this should be a separate complaint!!!!!! (they are a joke)

There is another PPC which has now left the BPA - I updated that thread yesterday also. (https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4835260)
So it is now going to be inevitable that more tickets are coming through.
There were a couple of one time NEWBIE posters who hijacked threads with a new case - but these never came back on a new thread.

CM - I was going to suggest that your NEWBIE thread be updated with IPC details and perhaps for now just list their members.

4consumerrights

Using the allegedly independent appeals system via the IPC requires a form to be downloaded, signed and returned within 21 days of the rejection letter from their member quoting the URN (unique reference number)

http://media.wix.com/ugd/bd9e08_7c8347973f9a1d387078a5026a331931.pdf


Note all grounds and supplementary evidence must be included at the same time (no additional info added)

The form also asks a whole heap of questions and requires the
date of birth ????
tick boxes confirming driver yes/no and keeper yes/no etc

and the bottom box:

The information contained in this appeal form, and any attached evidence,
is true to the best of myknowledge and belief and I provide the information knowing that if it is tendered into evidence, I shall be liable to prosecution if I have wilfully stated anything which I know to be false or do not believe to be true

signed and printed names and dated

WOW!

Considering most of their members carry out security work without the requisite licence can they be reported to the police as well? And for no valid contracts? no GPEOL etc etc lack of signage.

The say that the appeal can only be decided on points of law and yet apparently infer elsewhere on website that breach of COP will not be considered.

Redx

I have a golden rule of NEVER giving out details like D.O.B. unless its for the government etc, like doctors, hospitals , inland revenue , DWP etc

certainly not to some tinpot private adjudication service

peter_the_piper

""The information contained in this appeal form, and any attached evidence,
is true to the best of myknowledge and belief and I provide the information knowing that if it is tendered into evidence, I shall be liable to prosecution if I have wilfully stated anything which I know to be false or do not believe to be true""

not trying to pretend they are the law surely?

kirkbyinfurnesslad_2

Yes coupon definitely need to test and as you remember we started off with a loss, but we soon got in to gear didnt we.

Theres nothing that ive read that means you cant do a different appeal, i think at the moment theres no point giving the ppc a sniff to cancel the ticket, loosing your chance to test the ipc...

HO87

peter_the_piper wrote: »

""The information contained in this appeal form, and any attached evidence,
is true to the best of my knowledge and belief and I provide the information knowing that if it is tendered into evidence, I shall be liable to prosecution if I have wilfully stated anything which I know to be false or do not believe to be true""

not trying to pretend they are the law surely?

Why am I not surprised? This is a slightly reworked version of the declaration on a standard s.9 Witness Statement - as used by the police. This can't be another attempt by PPC fellow travellers to portray authority they don't have can it?

As for the IPC IAS appeals mechanism and the information required - specifically the requirement that the appellant discloses the name and address of the driver as previously posted a complaint was made to the DVLA (the IPC's ATA status is effectively still probationary) at the beginning of October 2013.

The complaint pointed out that the requirement that this information be disclosed in order for an appeal to be considered, effectively circumvented POFA - where PPC's may only invite the keeper to provide the information. The appeals process, with the appellant setting out his case and the details then being provided to the PPC for a response leaves the disclosure of the driver details - which they are not entitled to - at significant risk.

Even if that detail was not provided to the PPC directly, the DVLA were reminded that PPC's have resorted to using applications for Norwich Pharmacal Orders in the past - in an effort to get at driver details - and in all but one case (we know of - and that was a hire/lease company) failed. However, in many respects were an application to be made against the IPC IAS their situation closely mirrors that of the Customs and Excise, who were on the receiving end of the original NPO, and could they resist the application? More importantly, do they have the bottomless pockets of HMRC to fight the case? And in any event HMRC lost the case and were obliged to disclose the details required by Norwich Pharmacal.

Updates from Swansea have been thin but in one the matter was, seemingly, the topic of discussions between IPC and the DVLA and in the most recent, it is understood, that the matter has been referred to the DfT for guidance. Watch this space.