IPC appeal PCN NW Limited

Stroma

Maybe, but it's in the public interest to say that Gladstones Solictitors Limited are connected to the nefarious parking industry, they both share a director, and a parking company shares a very similar address. This is all public information.

If Gladstones Solicitors Limited don't like it, then tough luck I will post the above information on every thread that has an IPC member involved

4consumerrights

Yep Stroma added to the facts that the IPC refer their members to Gladstones for business in wording for signage and NtK and contracts and that their appeals are assessed by a solicitor for a charge of either £15 or £15 to the PPC depending on the outcome.

Still no mention of who these solicitors/barrister are - why would they get out of bed for just that sum?

Still no mention of who the committee members are that oversee any alleged breaches of code of practice. Certainly non-independent in every way so far......

Redx

Kc85 wrote: »

Oh ok, sorry it is all very confusing and I get a bit lost with it all!

Ok so I am currently writing an appeal using the POPLA letters from the link, so I guess I submit that and see what happens. I didn't realise they was on the DVLA register.

Would you advise that I also include my original appeal letter to PCN NW that was rejected?

the fact is that you have 2 choices

either you have an IPC reference and send them a similar appeal to a popla appeal, using the same precedents and facts etc , within their timescales , and see what happens

OR , you ignore everything from now on except an LBA , or an LBCC , or court papers (so ignoring all correspondence from the PPC and their debt collectors etc)

this is no different when its a BPA approved operator like PE , but in your case the ppc is with the IPC , not the bpa

think of it as like darts , we basically had the giant B.D.O. and then the B.D.C. was set up in competition with the main player on the world stage , both do a similar job, possibly different rules etc ,but both legitimised ( same thing happened in Rugby too, with Union and League)

so that appeal needs sorting RAPIDO if you are indeed submitting it !

as for your original PPC appeal, only you know what it said and nobody here can tell you if it should be sent or not for one simple reason, we have no experience of IPC appeals , due to it being a new player in this cesspool

so to reiterate, we cannot advise you properly because we havent seen any IPC appeals or outcomes yet ( did I mention this earlier ? )

Kc85

Thanks all,

It was a windscreen ticket which I now realise from the link I perhaps should have waited and seen if something came through the post but I appealed it via email.

They supplied a form for appealing to the IPC and a IAS number.

The rejected it as a breach of the terms of conditions of parking occurred, you had no valid permit on display. Which I didn't but I also didn't realise that you couldn't park in that area, the parking attendant when approached pointed out the area in which I could park which he failed to inform me of 15 minutes early before placing the ticket and ultimately went on to advise I could have parked in an un-marked bay as long as it was within the authorised area!!!

From research there are also two different companies on the signage!

I will have a look at the IPC links now thank you :-)

hoohoo

The main problem I have with the IPC is that the motorist does not get to see the operator's evidence, but the operator gets to see the motorist's. Thus the motorist does not get a true right of reply and the process is fundamentally biased.

I therefore cannot see many motorists being satisfied by this, and if they lose they will then consider ignoring the operator unless they take the case to court, at which point the motorist does get a fairer crack at the whip.

This kind of defeats the whole purpose.

I would suggest that if the OP also feels the same way, they complain to the DVLA they are not getting a fair appeal and ask why the DVLA allowed this setup in the first place.

hugh.evans@dvla.gsi.gov.uk is probably the right address to get attention

spacey2012

The DVLA could not give two stuffs.
Selling data and income protection come well before us surfs.

4consumerrights

@Redx - ignoring PCN (NW) is not a good idea as they do like issuing court papers. Also it is a good opportunity to test this new system out.

Redx

4consumerrights wrote: »

@Redx - ignoring PCN (NW) is not a good idea as they do like issuing court papers. Also it is a good opportunity to test this new system out.

I agree , but the OP seemed to want to ignore it, so I pointed out his choices in the matter, its down to him how he proceeds

I also pointed out that somebody has to be the "guinea pig" , the "pathfinder" , so if he wishes to take on that burden then he can do so

I just think my replies to the OP got lost in all the anti IPC talk

Stroma

It's important that the OP understands this fully, this appeal process whilst new with this lot, doesn't appear at first glance to be independent. If gladstones employ or contract these so called solicitors who oversee the appeals, how then can it be anything but biased?

Like popla it's not independent, the pay masters are the ATA in control, they are all there to ensure that parking companies can rip off the motorists! I have said from the start that popla is not fit for purpose, the same I believe will be with these .

Kc85

Hi

Just to confirm I will be appealing- up to page 4! I really cannot stand Company's that behave in such a manner and would like to hope that appeals processes are impartial but I guess I will soon see!!!