IMPORTANT REMINDER: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information. If you are uploading images, please take extra care that you have redacted all personal information.

Capital2Coast - IPC / IAS appeal help

edited 1 June 2014 at 9:12PM in Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking
22 replies 3.1K views
2

Replies

  • RedxRedx Forumite
    37.7K Posts
    Eighth Anniversary 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    I dont wish to appear pedantic or nitpicking here , BUT I feel I have to be on this occasion

    if you are going to appeal about their wording of signs and letters and demands , I feel its important to be impeccable in your own wordings and statements etc , to be beyond reproach so to speak

    so when I read this through , including the title , I noticed one aspect thats incorrect, a minor one but important and not sure if its mild dyslexia like I suffer from or what, but its the spelling of CAPITAL , with I before T , not CAPTIAL as is being posted on here

    I would take the moral high ground with their mistakes by committing none yourself , so use a spelling checker and get your draft appeal checked so there is no ambiguity and dont repeat their mistakes yourself either

    so its CAPITAL2COAST in any of your correspondence , and all wordings double or triple checked so the assessor focuses on your legal arguments about their wordings , not your own wordings or spelling etc

    sorry to say this but I feel its important having read the above reasons you will be using as your appeal points to the IAS ,

    GOOD LUCK
    Newbies !!
    Private Parking ticket? check the 2 sticky threads by coupon-mad and crabman in the Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking Board forum for the latest advice or maybe try pepipoo or C.A.G. or legal beagles forums if you need legal advice as well because this parking forum is not about debt collectors or legal matters per se
  • The_Slithy_ToveThe_Slithy_Tove Forumite
    3.9K Posts
    Tenth Anniversary 1,000 Posts
    ✭✭✭✭
    Dee140157 wrote: »
    [URL]Http://s28.postimg.org/5m7nilw4d/Parking_Sign.jpg[/URL]

    ...

    Definitely mentions contractual agreement!
    It may say that, but the very first bit of the sign in extremely large font says "permit holders only". That makes the presumption (IMO) that a non-permit holder is therefore a trespasser. I.e. there is no "offer to park" for non-permit holders. So contracts don't come into it. It's a matter of trespass, pure and simple. And we all know what the damages for trespass are in such cases (hint: approx. zero).
  • trip911trip911 Forumite
    7 Posts
    Redx wrote: »
    I dont wish to appear pedantic or nitpicking here , BUT I feel I have to be on this occasion

    if you are going to appeal about their wording of signs and letters and demands , I feel its important to be impeccable in your own wordings and statements etc , to be beyond reproach so to speak

    sorry to say this but I feel its important having read the above reasons you will be using as your appeal points to the IAS ,

    GOOD LUCK

    I completely agree Redx, rather embarrassing that I didn't notice it! That will teach me for adding it to the spell checker to get rid of the red line!

    Is there anyway to edit the title of the thread so that it is correct? I assume this will mean it will be searchable for anyone else in the future...

    I have written up a draft appeal based on my understanding of everything and the input from this thread. I think it still needs work, in particular the IPC not allowing breaching of contact business models as I can't seem to find where this is mentioned?

    Hopefully its a good starting point.... and would be grateful for any feedback?

    ****

    I wish to contest the Fixed Charge Notice issued by Capital 2 Coast on the ******* 2014 due to the following reasons;

    1

    The Notice to keeper dated the 17th April 2014 does not comply with the Protection Of Freedom Acts 2012 Schedule 4 for the following reasons;

    - It does not inform the keeper that the driver is required to pay the parking charges breaching paragraph 8-2B

    - It does not inform the keeper of a period of parking it merely states a time the PCN was issued breaching paragraph 8-2C

    - It does not clearly state that Capital 2 Coast do not know the name of the driver or their address, it merely states they have made no representation. It also does not invite the keeper to pay for the parking charges or to pass on the notice to the driver, it merely threatens further charges and court action if it is unpaid. This breaches paragraph 8-2E

    - There was no evidence provided other than a photograph of a pillar with the block of flats name on it and an unreadable sign in the background breaching paragraph 8-7 prescribed by paragraph 10.

    Also at no point have Capital 2 Coast provided any evidence that they have the permission of the land owner to provide the parking scheme.

    Due to these points as the registered keeper of the vehicle I have no liability.

    2

    Capital 2 Coast claims that there has been a breach of contract. This business model is not allowed by the IPC. Capital 2 Coast make numerous references to contraventions and breaching of parking conditions in both the notice to keeper and their appeal rejection letter. They also state “the pre-estimate of loss does not apply on a breach of contract”.

    3

    The driver had parked on the land with the permission of a flat occupier to drop off and collect items, crucially a parking permit. This occupier pays part of the maintenance of the building which includes the parking area which they are able to use at no cost. Please find attached a statement from the occupier confirming this which clearly shows that the driver was not on the land as a trespasser.

    4

    The sign placed in the car park is not clear and does not conform to the IPC codes of practice for the following reasons;

    - The sign states that by parking you are only contractually agreeing to be issued with a fixed charge notice, it does not state that you are contractually agreeing to pay a fixed charge notice

    - The sign states that a £60 administration fee will be added if the fixed charge notice is not paid however the Protection of Freedoms Act states that keeper liability can is only allowed for the sum of the parking charge

    - The text size sign in question does not conform to the IPC codes of practice. The second line of text is less that 50% the size of the first line and is simply mass of small text and not easy to read at all as you enter the car park in a moving vehicle and is easily missed.

    - The sign has a blank site ID number.

    - The sign has had IPC stickers placed over other logos clearly showing that Capital 2 Coast did not update their car park signs when they joined the IPC in November 2013 – this is not professional, another point mentioned by the IPC codes of practice.

    - The block of flats and the parking area around it clearly invites parking. There is no “P” on the sign which should be including in line with the IPC codes of practice.

    - There are no signs on in an obvious position – as you enter the block of flats – surely a prime place to locate a sign?

    5

    I believe Capital 2 Coast have used predatory tactics – something that is not allowed in the IPC codes of practice. The vehicle that received the fixed charge notice is a sign written business vehicle and has a clearly visible contact telephone number as pictured. No contact was attempt to the driver via this telephone number and a fixed charge notice issued instead. Why was no contact even attempted to ascertain the circumstances of the vehicle being parked?

    6
    On the appeals rejection letter from Capital 2 Coast there was no mention that an appeal to IAS had to be completed within 21 days. This is a key fact and it is not professional to omit a key detail.

    ****
  • RedxRedx Forumite
    37.7K Posts
    Eighth Anniversary 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    you can edit the thread title using edit -advanced in post #1
    Newbies !!
    Private Parking ticket? check the 2 sticky threads by coupon-mad and crabman in the Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking Board forum for the latest advice or maybe try pepipoo or C.A.G. or legal beagles forums if you need legal advice as well because this parking forum is not about debt collectors or legal matters per se
  • Coupon-madCoupon-mad
    101.8K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭✭✭
    Bear in mind when you submit the appeal to IAS that you no longer have to say who was driving even though the IAS haven't yet changed the appeals page:

    http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/consumer-pressure-forces-change-to-ias.html
    in particular the IPC not allowing breaching of contact business models as I can't seem to find where this is mentioned?
    I can't find the quote on this now - maybe someone else can dig it out tomorrow and provide a link. I se after a quick skim-read that the IPC CoP does allow for breach of contract (if there's a GPEOL). It is odd though as I know I have read something by the IPC (maybe a quote by William Hurley?) that IPC AOS members must operate a contractual fee model after they join the IPC.

    Re this bit, the paragraph needs expanding:
    Capital 2 Coast claims that there has been a breach of contract. This business model is not allowed by the IPC as I understand AOS members are required to operate a contractual fee model. Capital 2 Coast make numerous references to contraventions and breaching of parking conditions in both the notice to keeper and their appeal rejection letter. They also state “the pre-estimate of loss does not apply on a breach of contract.” Clearly this is nonsense and they do not understand the business model they are trying to enforce. A failure to show there was a genuine pre-estimate of loss behind a charge for breach renders it unrecoverable in law.
    and this point needs to be added into the flaws about the sign:
    It may say that, but the very first bit of the sign in extremely large font says "permit holders only". That makes the presumption (IMO) that a non-permit holder is therefore a trespasser. I.e. there is no "offer to park" for non-permit holders. So contracts don't come into it. It's a matter of trespass, pure and simple. And we all know what the damages for trespass are in such cases (hint: approx. zero).
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
    CLICK at the top of this/any page where it says:
    Forum Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
  • HO87HO87 Forumite
    4.3K Posts
    +1

    You cannot on the one hand be lawfully prevented from doing something and then held to the terms of a contract based on you doing the same act. Having been rendered a trespasser (Permit Holders Only) you are liable to proceedings for trespass and nothing else.

    It is clear that the reason for this illogical dance is to attempt to obscure the real purposes of the so-called contractual charge which is that it is a penalty - plan and simple - and is being used as a means of deterring those without permits from parking.

    Based on their signs it would seem that C2C not only require some guidance in punctuation but also in critical thinking and logic. My rates are very reasonable. Crayons are not permitted.
    My very sincere apologies for those hoping to request off-board assistance but I am now so inundated with requests that in order to do justice to those "already in the system" I am no longer accepting PM's and am unlikely to do so for the foreseeable future (August 2016). :(

    For those seeking more detailed advice and guidance regarding small claims cases arising from private parking issues I recommend that you visit the Private Parking forum on PePiPoo.com
  • trip911trip911 Forumite
    7 Posts
    Thanks for the feedback guys.

    Coupon-Mad I have added the extra bits to the points you mentioned and added this regarding the post by The Slithy Tove;

    It clearly states in the largest font on the sign “Permit Holders Only”. This would suggest that anyone without a permit would be a trespasser and as such a contract would not come into effect. As such this would mean that Capital 2 Coast should be pursuing a case of trespass and nothing else. In this situation the damages for a case of trespass are zero.

    Obviously the driver was not a trespasser as they had been invited to the land by a flat occupier. Capital 2 Coast made no attempt to establish this and make no reference to it at any point


    I couldn't as yet find anything in relation to the IPC stating breaching of contacts business model is not allow but I will continue to search for this. Even if I can't find any supporting evidence I shall still include it unless the advice would be not too?

    Speaking of evidence I intend to include a signed "statement" from the flat occupier covering that the driver invited to the land and that they were attending the flat to pick up items and drop off items (plus anything else you lot think is required). Along with photos of the sign and copies of the NTK and appeals rejection letter. Do I need to provide the codes of practice, copies of the POFA etc. or are these documents that the IAS would normally have anyway?

    Thanks for the reminder about not identifying the driver, the appeal will be from the registered keeper and will not identify who the driver was. I think its pretty poor that the form hasn't yet been updated.
  • Coupon-madCoupon-mad
    101.8K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭✭✭
    trip911 wrote: »
    Thanks for the feedback guys.

    Coupon-Mad I have added the extra bits to the points you mentioned and added this regarding the post by The Slithy Tove...

    I couldn't as yet find anything in relation to the IPC stating breaching of contacts business model is not allow but I will continue to search for this. Even if I can't find any supporting evidence I shall still include it unless the advice would be not too?

    Speaking of evidence I intend to include a signed "statement" from the flat occupier covering that the driver invited to the land and that they were attending the flat to pick up items and drop off items (plus anything else you lot think is required). Along with photos of the sign and copies of the NTK and appeals rejection letter. Do I need to provide the codes of practice, copies of the POFA etc. or are these documents that the IAS would normally have anyway?

    Thanks for the reminder about not identifying the driver, the appeal will be from the registered keeper and will not identify who the driver was. I think its pretty poor that the form hasn't yet been updated.

    You don't need to include any of the stuff in bold and I can no longer find the info where the IPC said new AOS members only operate under a contractual fee model so leave it out unless someone finds it.


    :)
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
    CLICK at the top of this/any page where it says:
    Forum Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
  • This has been a very helpful and informative thread but really keen to know if you won your IPC appeal??
  • pogofishpogofish Forumite
    10.8K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    xeenies wrote: »
    This has been a very helpful and informative thread but really keen to know if you won your IPC appeal??

    Please don't hijack other peoples threads - you already have your own on the go!
This discussion has been closed.
Latest MSE News and Guides