G24 Parked outside a Marked bay…

Malapert

Hi. I received a CPN from G24 for having a wheel parked half on a marked bay line, and half over - onto a triangular 'dead' area, rather than another parking bay recently. Which is exactly the same as another member did in the same car park (and about the same time) and whose posts appear on 2nd or 3rd December. Having read various advice etc, like NapeDog before me, I sent the standard letter to G24 complaining mostly that the charges didn't relate to their pre-estimate of loss etc as it was supposedly free parking in a retail park. Unlike Napedog, whose 'charges' were dropped, I got a 3 pager back telling me to pay up. I guess I will be appealing to the IAS. According to the letter, the charges are justified as they are 'likely to amount to liquidated damages in the event of a breach of contract (as per their signage)". Needless to say, I'm not happy. Specific advice would be welcomed. I have 2 weeks and it's xmas...

AltheHibby

You will beat them. Read the newbie threads and don't let them spoil Christmas.

Umkomaas

IAS is almost as predictable as POPLA - but in the opposite direction. Since the IPC's approval as an ATA by the DVLA, their Independent Appeals Service's recent decisions, that we are aware of, are distinctly weighted against the motorist and decidedly in favour of the PPC.

What would anyone expect from an 'independent' body (the IAS) that is so inextricably linked to the IPC (the PPCs trade body), other than a fair and transparent system? Dream on!

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2014/12/independent-parking-committee-kangaroo.html

You can appeal, especially if G24 are using former BPA signage (breach of contract) - that has an outside chance of success, it at least shows you have 'gone through the process', should this ever go to the small claims court (where you are likely to get a much more impartial hearing).

Alternatively, ignore the remainder of this process and take your chance on whether G24 have the intellect, the capacity and the cojones to proceed to the SCC. They have no track record of doing such in the past.

Coupon-mad

AltheHibby wrote: »

You will beat them. Read the newbie threads and don't let them spoil Christmas.

Yes but beat them by ignoring them, or merely reply that you decline to use the IAS because it has been exposed as not fit for purpose:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2014/12/independent-parking-committee-kangaroo.html

And so you will not be paying nor responding further except if they attempt a small claim, in which case you will defend robustly and you are fully aware their signage is lacking and their charge is not based on a GPEOL. Then just collect the threatograms that follow, and make sure your file includes a photo of the wording of the sign (as it stands now) just in case.

Malapert

Thanks for the messages. No IAS, then. Depressing to think there may be debt collector letters on the way, and yet more rubbish to deal with. I've looked at the picture of their signage, and it does say "if you breach any of the above Ts&Cs of use you agree to pay …". I'll write back to G24 telling them i am declining the IAS. I guess demanding a POPLA number instead is just a waste of my time?

Coupon-mad

You can't have POPLA, and to my certain knowledge, no small claims have ever been tried by a PPC for 'being over a bay line' (especially pointless in a case where, as you describe, the car wasn't even encroaching on another bay).

As for collecting debt collector letters being depressing, far from it!

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/3829727

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/67206460#Comment_67206460

We have laughed at this letter chain for almost a decade!

Umkomaas

Malapert wrote: »

Thanks for the messages. No IAS, then. Depressing to think there may be debt collector letters on the way, and yet more rubbish to deal with. I've looked at the picture of their signage, and it does say "if you breach any of the above Ts&Cs of use you agree to pay …". I'll write back to G24 telling them i am declining the IAS. I guess demanding a POPLA number instead is just a waste of my time?

POPLA has nothing now to do with G24, unless your parking event was prior to them joining the IPC on 1/10/2014.

If you've got photos of the 'breach' signage, there's nothing lost in submitting an IAS appeal. Up to you; use a closely related POPLA appeal from the NEWBIES sticky (post #3 - How to win at POPLA) - make sure you attach photo(s) and anything else you are submitting before pressing the 'Send' button. You can't submit further evidence later.

Don't concern yourself with debt collector letters, DCs and their letters are powerless, just keep their letters safe, in case of a (unlikely) SCC claim at a later stage.

Here's G24's record of issuing court proceedings over the past 18 months or so!

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/322893/british-parking-association.doc

Malapert

Thanks for the posts on debt collectors and the freedom of info letter. Maybe my new year is looking a lot more entertaining than I imagined! Guess I'll just sit tight and watch them pour their money down the drain. More fool them.

Coupon-mad

That's the spirit! If you do get a real small claim we'd help you defend it. Won't happen.

Guys_Dad

My advice is to ALWAYS appeal to IAS/POPLA. The reason is simple. Apart from the cost to the PPC, and the chance that you will win, should this ever get to court, you have a brownie point.

Judges are humans - each with their own views and self values. Most of them would not willingly use their time on such piffling matters as parking charges and having to read through 50-odd pages of waffle from the PPC.

Now if you haven't availed yourself of an "independent" appeal service to avoid blocking up court schedules, they may not be very pleased with you even before the case started. Be sure that the PPC will use this fact to their advantage.

Another important thing about IAS adjudications is that they turn the law on its head about who has to approve what, they accept PPC statements as true but don't give the motorist the same courtesy and even ignore the requirements for keeper liability or POFA wording on signs and NtKs.

Their obvious misinterpretation of the law and clear lack of independence can be used to your advantage if a PPC were to claim that the independent appeal service had already turned down this vexatious litigant's claim.

That's my reasoned take on the situation.

Coupon-mad

I feel it's better, if you are going to do something, to write to the PPC if IAS if offered and say why you are not going to avail yourself of the IAS at this juncture until the IPC provides an ADR which is seen to be unbiased and independent. That also paves the way to appear reasonable in court later (court won't happen though).

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2014/12/independent-parking-committee-kangaroo.html


HTH