Windscreen ticket from PCM (UK)

Coupon-mad

Your postal address of course, if sending a postal letter (I'm not teaching people how to write a letter so IMHO it goes without saying in the Newbies thread). But don't hold your breath about PCM accepting the 'challenge' and unless they have old signs up (BPA version) forget the IAS stage as they are considered here to be useless and consumer unfriendly, not worth bothering with due to some (in our view) terrible decisions.

So this may be a wasted exercise unless they have old BPA signs up.* Make sure nothing in your letter says who was driving.

Your saving grace might be the factual error of 'Blabla Court as opposed to 'Bla bla Close' but I am still not sure IAS appeal is worth it!


*EDIT - I just checked your pics:

http://s1368.photobucket.com/user/ihavesize16feet/media/20141015_154718_zpsdce1b491.jpg.html

They are new IPC signs so you will end up in 'ignoring the debt collectors' mode like the other posters on here with PCM (and other IPC member) tickets now. PCM will refuse your appeal but send it anyway as the template includes a drop hands offer and a Notice of Cancellation which will help if ever they try a small claim later on (no biggie, honestly, small claims defences are easier than doomed 'IAS appeals'!).

Tootalltom

Thank you. There was logic behind including the postal address in the letter or not. (I might be a newbie and not 100 perfect at posting etc but I'm not completely stupid). That is the address of the registered keeper is the location of the car park. I don't think I made this clear originally. My mistake, but then the letter I was composing doesn't contain any reference to who the driver is except that the driver has spoken to me. So they would have to presume but can't prove who the driver was because it was never admitted.

EnigmaPart1

Tootalltom wrote: »

Thank you. There was logic behind including the postal address in the letter or not. (I might be a newbie and not 100 perfect at posting etc but I'm not completely stupid). That is the address of the registered keeper is the location of the car park. I don't think I made this clear originally. My mistake, but then the letter I was composing doesn't contain any reference to who the driver is except that the driver has spoken to me. So they would have to presume but can't prove who the driver was because it was never admitted.

that has no relevance what so ever

Coupon-mad

Tootalltom wrote: »

Thank you. There was logic behind including the postal address in the letter or not. (I might be a newbie and not 100 perfect at posting etc but I'm not completely stupid). That is the address of the registered keeper is the location of the car park. I don't think I made this clear originally. My mistake, but then the letter I was composing doesn't contain any reference to who the driver is except that the driver has spoken to me. So they would have to presume but can't prove who the driver was because it was never admitted.

Yep you are right, that's fine. You must put a postal address in to the appeal so it may as well be the resident's one (could have been me who was driving seeing as anyone with fully comp insurance can driver other cars with permission!). Could have been thousands of people in the UK, not just you, a friend or relative, and they have no idea...but that won't wash with IAS.

It's up to you when you get the rejection letter whether you want to join the growing number of ignorers of the so-called IPC IAS system, or whether you want to try IAS (purely because of the location inaccuracy). I think you might have a chance on that point alone but you would have to PROVE it with pictures and information and the IAS might still say snootily 'this is without merit'.

Well we think they are without merit! If you just try to say you were not the driver and that the PPC haven't served a compliant NTK, the IAS will pathetically say 'he hasn't admitted who was driving so I am safe to assume it was him so I am ignoring all the points about the NTK'.

Couldn't make it up, could you?! This is mean to be an independent appeals service. So unless a person can also PROVE they were not driving (statement signed by employer saying they were at work at the exact time/date, for example!) and attach a copy of both sides of the NTK with flaws highlighted clearly (a person is expected to provide PROOF!) then forget it... unless you want to just try and PROVE the location error.

If you can't be bothered with the kangaroo court of IAS then we won't blame you and plenty of people are in your shoes (Harni2013 and aass11 to name 2 recent ones).

Tootalltom

Many thanks for your help Coupon-mad. I posted the letter today and it will arrive before the 28 days is up...

I will update things when there is new progress. I am willing to put effort into things regarding an ias appeal. I think with the location error plus non conforming signage and their locations unreadable at night and any other errors in their letters or communications I have a fighting chance. More so than those who fight but only on the basis of the "standard" errors. We shall see. Worst case after my "knees aren't trembling" threating letters is the small claims court where the argument will be decided with no bias to pcm.

Coupon-mad

signage and their locations unreadable at night

You would need proof, photos taken without a flash and then a photo taken with car headlights in the space...showing that the sign behind is still not lit/reflective. Everything has to be proved to IAS and they'll still let you down as an 'independent' appeals service. Think carefully as people who lose at IAS swiftly get a Letter before County Court Claim whereas ignorers who don't try IAS, get debt collector letters they can ignore. Not saying the second lot would never get a LBCCC but it's much quicker after IAS have put their spanner in the works.

Tootalltom

I have received a response to my appeal.

PCM have ignored the stated fact about the blabla close/court issue and have changed all evidence online to court but state on the appeal letter that it is close not court, despite what the windscreen ticket states that being close.

Luckily for me I had screen snipped all evidence with the date and time stamps as evidence that they have subsequently changed the location plus of course have the original windscreen ticket hard copy which shows the issued location.

There is a small amount of rage surging through my veins at the moment so I will be considering my next move carefully after a cup of tea and a slice of cake!

Tootalltom

PCM are clearly following this thread closely, as now when I log in the evidence has changed back to close! Do they think that people are completely stupid? Sadly I didn't get to snip the changed evidence in time as my "session" had expired.

Coupon-mad

So now decide whether to bother with Mr Hurley's friends at the kangaroo court or not? I wouldn't. PCM can go swivel.