Please help with park with ease/IAS appeal

StaffsSW

bazster wrote: »

You are correct in your interpretation, they didn't comply with PoFA therefore they can't hold the keeper liable. It may be that failing to comply with PoPLA is incompetence rather than policy and that generally they do try to comply. On the other hand maybe they couldn't give a stuff and simply rely on mugs paying up without realising they don't have to (just as all these scum did before PoFA 2012 was enacted).

However, the joke IAS has decided to adopt the policy that if an appellant doesn't state whether they were the driver they will simply presume (on the basis of no evidence) that they were. So, if you genuinely weren't driving you need to categorically say so in your appeal. It'd be interesting to see how the IAS so-called adjudicator dealt with that: would he/she be willing to go as far as calling you a liar?

I've got the opportunity today to lodge a formal appeal on the IAS system, and I can undeniably prove that the keeper wasn't the driver at the time. Currently doing lots of research on their typical replies and get-outs, and have will have some assistance in preparing the case.

Coupon-mad

As long as you can 'prove' with attached evidence that you were not driving, and also attach as 'evidence' BOTH sides of the Notice to Keeper, highlighting the date, you could win this IAS appeal on that point alone. But personally I would also have a look at the signage wording too because that can win an IAS case. But you must attach the evidence including the back the NTK otherwise the 'so called independent' IAS will say some old tripe about 'not showing the whole NTK' or something.

I feel we should be reporting the IAS to the SRA each time they play stupid prats. In the one the other day that an OP lost, (but of course won't be paying) we had the IAS barrister pretending they didn't know the difference between express consent and implied consent and that 'service' only meant utility bills. They deserve to be reported.

Edna_Basher

If the car park signs were similar to the one pictured in The Slithy Tove’s post #10 then I think that even the IAS will be unable to come up with an excuse to reject your appeal.

Fundamentally, the sign is incapable of forming any contract between Park With Ease Ltd and the driver. The sign quotes only the words “Park with ease” and the driver is more likely to think that this is merely an instruction rather than a reference to Park With Ease Ltd (Company Number 07919606 with its Registered Office located at Unit F, The Court, Kestrel Road, Trafford Park, Manchester, M17 1SF). If it has failed to display its full name, Company Number and Registered Address, Park With Ease Ltd will be in breach of Company Trading Disclosure Regulations.

Even if the sign were capable of forming a contract between Park With Ease Ltd and the driver, it would still fail to create any potential liability for the Registered Keeper in any circumstance where the Registered Keeper was not the driver (regardless of whether an NTK was delivered within the POFA timescales).

The sign states that if you (i.e. the driver) fail to pay the parking charge you (i.e. the driver) accept that we will obtain your (i.e. the driver’s) name and address from DVLA and you (i.e. the driver) will be liable to pay our costs for obtaining payment from you (i.e. the driver). Where the driver was not the Registered Keeper, it would be quite an achievement for Park With Ease Ltd to obtain the driver’s name and address from the DVLA!

It would be handy to see the car park signs from your particular case.

seasailor46

Thanks for all the replies and great info, it's much appreciated. I'll be driving past the site tomorrow so I think I'll call in and take some photo's of the signage before I lodge my appeal with the IAS.

I'm appealing on the grounds of the NTK arriving late and not being the driver, although at the moment I don't know how I can prove I wasn't the driver.

I'll post the pictures up of the signage over the weekend and draft my appeal before submitting.

Thanks again for all the help.

bazster

One way of proving you weren't the driver would be to provide a witness statement from the driver.

In theory this should be an end to it: once your appeal is upheld on the grounds you weren't the driver the ticket is dead, they can't then pursue the driver for it. However, since this is the IPC/IAS they might twist it somehow so as to then pursue the driver, so it's not a risk-free approach and could only be recommended if you wanted to test the IAS and were relaxed about the outcome.

Simply asserting that you weren't the driver would put them in the awkward position of either accepting your word or calling you a liar.

Guys_Dad

The witness statement could be from someone else who was present. They need not admit to being the driver.

bazster

Guys_Dad wrote: »

The witness statement could be from someone else who was present. They need not admit to being the driver.

Good point. Also a witness statement from someone who was in a position to know where the keeper was at the time.

seasailor46

Totally confused now! Appealed to Park with Ease a few days after receiving the NTK and it was refused as per the first post at the beginning of this thread, today I've received a 'parking charge - remains unpaid' letter asking for payment, it goes on to say if I dispute liability then I need to appeal to them (Park with Ease) and if the appeal is unsuccessful then they will provide me with details of how to appeal to the IAS.

I'm assuming this is just one hand not knowing what the other one is doing, therefore should I ignore the letter and press on with the appeal to the IAS?

Incidentally I visited the car park again on Saturday and the sign is different to the one in the Lake District, will try and post the picture up later.

bazster

Are you sure both notices are for the same "event"?

Coupon-mad

It's probably a reminder so ignore it. Show us your draft IAS appeal first - I would say base it loosely on this one including point #7 as shown in post #16 but with the added proof of not being the driver:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5078715

...as I would like to have another go at the IAS about the Consumer Cancellation Regs and head them off. I reckon I can knock their drivel on the head up front about 'utilities' and 'express consent' and it would be amusing to try, seeing as you are going to the effort of an IAS appeal. I want to rebut what the barrister is likely to say in the rubbish 'decision'. I expect they will turn it down but so what, you can still 'cancel the contract' from my reading of the Regs!

Show us your draft, and when is your 21 days up from the date of the rejection letter?