Help for PCN in 'Visitors' space (Small PPC using IAS)

lybwgf

OK.

Similarly, is it OK to point out breaches on the PCN (if there are any) if I'm appealing as Keeper (not driver)?

Is there any suggestion that I shouldn't have the PCN if I'm appealing as Keeper, or that in having it, I'm acknowledging being driver?

Thanks.

da_rule

Nope, who's to say that you weren't a passenger, or that the driver didn't leave it in the car or hand it to you.

Guys_Dad

Ask the IPC to instruct them to cancel the ticket as well !!!!!

Coupon-mad

That's a good complaint about them - in the meantime once you have appealed to Link, read the IPC Code of Practice in full and find other breaches and be ready for your second stage appeal as I think you only get 21 days tops from the code/rejection letter date.

It would be fun at IAS/IPC independent appeal stage to cite all those CoP breaches and also throw in the words of this POPLA assessor (yes, a POPLA assessor, what fun to quote POPLA findings to the IPC!):

POPLA Assessor, Marina Kapour, from a POPLA case won in the last few days:

''The charge must either be one for damages as submitted by the Appellant, or consideration - the price paid for parking - as submitted by the Operator. In order for the charge to be consideration, the parking charge must be paid in return for something, here permission to park beyond the maximum permitted stay. In other words, the sign must permit the motorist to park beyond the maximum stay, provided he or she pay the charge. Clearly, permission to park ‘in breach’ is not granted, and so the parking charge cannot be a contractual price. Instead, it is clear that the charge is in fact a sum sought as damages, and therefore must be a genuine preestimate of the loss which may be caused by the parking breach. I find it seems clear that the signs in this car park do not give permission to park in return for the parking charge, and so it cannot be consideration.''

lybwgf

Thank you!

Please see the PCN here: tinypic.com/r/1zm1irl/8 and here: tinypic.com/r/314dv9s/8

da_rule

Clickable links:

http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=1zm1irl&s=8#.U0JeuO29LCQ
http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=314dv9s&s=8#.U0Jffe29LCQ

da_rule

Well the PCN looks a lot better than their website. The IPC code of conduct has a list of things that should be contained on the notice to driver, I would suggest you go through the list ticking the things off.

lybwgf

Thanks all.

I'll continue to prepare my complaint to the IPC and try to get ready for the second-stage appeal to the IAS, and resurrect this thread when I receive a NtK to run it all by you (if that's OK) for my peace of mind.

Thanks again.

Stroma

They say on the back that the driver details must be disclosed, so that is a breach of pofa 2012 as driver details are not required by the operator. So enclose the fake ticket as well, and highlight the part where the driver name and address is required.

lybwgf

Stroma wrote: »

They say on the back that the driver details must be disclosed, so that is a breach of pofa 2012 as driver details are not required by the operator. So enclose the fake ticket as well, and highlight the part where the driver name and address is required.

Thank you.

Which letter would you recommend adding that to? The appeal to Link, or the complaint to the IPC, or the 'second' appeal to IAS?

Sorry for the confusion. Thank you.