IAS Decisions

Dee140157

Hope this is ok, but think i think it is time to start an IAS decision thread.

This will be a little different from POPLA thread, as we do not hear the reasons for IAS decisions

Instead people who have to make IAS appeals have to have study details of how to write the appeals to succeed here, so please post your link to your appeal so that others can study it and crib ideas.

The date of the decision will be useful if it is an older one, but will become less important.

Dee140157

Popcorn141-decision 27/08/14 against PCM
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5039106

Dee140157

Mikeb2 - decision 22/08/14 against PCM
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5035342

peter_the_piper

Well done for getting this thread up and running.

Welsh_Exile

Hmm- just a thought-
The IAS hold appellants' personal details plus car reg number.
Would a Subject Access Request under the Data Protection Act not reveal all the information the IAS held on an individual? Including the reasons for any appeal decision?

bazster

Welsh_Exile wrote: »

Hmm- just a thought-
The IAS hold appellants' personal details plus car reg number.
Would a Subject Access Request under the Data Protection Act not reveal all the information the IAS held on an individual? Including the reasons for any appeal decision?

Genius! Great idea!

Dee140157

Margethechicken - 02/09/14 against CM Services
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5036026

A very late short appeal on pofa12. But still won.

Dee140157

Rustyshaz -02/09/14 against CM Services ltd
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5018175

bergkamp

This is not a win but surely it should be shouldn't it?

On cag- consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?423847-London-Parking-Solutions/page3

Dear ******,!


The Independent Appeals Service (IAS) has received a decision from the Independent Adjudicator regarding your recent appeal. Please see below for the full details.


parking charge!Number (pcn):!38*******
!e******
!05/08/2014

Appeal Outcome:!dismissed


The Adjudicators comments are as follows:!


"This appeal is brought on a number of grounds.
1 - I am the keeper not the driver and therefore not liable.
The keeper can be liable under Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. As the Appellant has not raised any issue with this process just the principle I have not considered this further.
2 - The signage refers to BPA and not IAS.!
This does not alter the terms of the contract that the Appellant has entered by parking on land managed by the Operator.
3 - The Appellant wants to know the genuine pre-estimate of loss.
Genuine pre-estimate of loss is irrelevant. By parking on land managed by the Operator the Appellant has entered a contract and agreed to abide by the conditions set out on the sign. One of those conditions makes it clear that in the absence of a displayed permit the Appellant agrees to pay a charge. It is therefore the price the Appellant has agreed to pay for parking. Loss would only be relevant if the claim was for breach of contract or trespass.
In the absence of a permit there is no expectation that the charge would need to be paid on the day.
"

As your appeal has been dismissed, the Independent Adjudicator has found, upon the evidence provided, that the!parking charge!was lawfully incurred.


As this appeal has not been resolved in your favour, the IAS is unable to intervene further in this matter.


The Operator must now allow you 14 days to make payment before they commence any action to enforce the charge.


Should you continue to contest the charge then you should consider obtaining independent legal advice.


Yours sincerely


The Independent Appeals Service

Coupon-mad

- I am the keeper not the driver and therefore not liable.
The keeper can be liable under Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. As the Appellant has not raised any issue with this process just the principle I have not considered this further.

It's an example of how not to appeal to the IAS. Looks like the appellant would have won if they'd produced evidence of the reason why the keeper isn't liable, including a copy of the Notice to Keeper annotated with all the flaws in the mandatory & prescriptive wording from Schedule 4, or showing it was late. Or showing why the land perhaps wasn't relevant land (with evidence).

CAG aren't great with their rather slapdash advice about private PCNs, POPLA appeals and IAS appeals and how to win. And their refusal to let people link here!

On here and on pepipoo we sussed out how to win at POPLA 18 months ago after a lot of hard work and tries. And the same is happening with the IAS appeals which we are saying MUST be more like a court defence with the evidence being shown by the motorist (unlike POPLA). Also no GPEOL is often not an argument for IPC PPCs if they are suing the newer signs.

A wasted appeal.

Redx

win at the IAS against CM Services Ltd (Comprehensive Management Services)

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4929266

took about 6 months start to finish