To appeal or not to appeal-IPC

Fight_the_good_fight

Over the last few weeks there appears to be contradictory advice whether it is worth appealing IPC related PCN's.

It is clear from the anecdote evidence on here that appealing is going to end in rejection.

With the above in mind surely it would be best advice to appeal no matter what the obvious outcome,so to evidence what a sham this appeal system is

TheFlamingRed

I personally agree to appeal and publish the rejection in addition to pointing out the flaws.

I can understand why some say not to bother, a newbie who isn't yet confident to their rights is more likely going to pay up if they see their appeal (short of court) has been denied. Or a newbie who doesn't want to or can't spend lots of time to make a good IAS appeal, knowing it will be rejected.

But for more experienced people, or people who grasp the private parking concepts well, should do an appeal. The Prankster blogged today about how ISPA have found that the other appeal service is 'suspect' (my paraphrasing) so we may as well keep up a piblic fight. I would really like to see some more obvsiously solid appeal points get blown away by IAS and get their name further sullied.

Ps. I would like to see people adding to their appeal, that they reserve the right to see the evidence of the other party before a decision is made, or the IAS contractually agrees to pay the appealer £150, contract is accepted by performance

Herzlos

It's going to get rejected anyway, and it's not binding on you, so you've got nothing to lose but the time to send it off.

Each rejection they make will make their figures look worse (DVLA will question why the reject rate has jumped from, say 50% to 99% if they do any reviews). Each dubious rejection you get on paper is also another arrow that can be used against them if anyone is ever collecting evidence as to how impartial/correct they are, and if it's blantantly flauting the regulations it gives you something to complain to the DVLA and potentially ICO or the court about.

Fight_the_good_fight

In addition to the kangaroo court system I was wondering if the PPC's have have reconfigured their contracts with the landowners to show they have jumped ship.

Marktheshark

Just puts it back to square one before POPLA.
Most judges refused the I was not the driver defence anyway so little has changed.
Remember PPC lose money every time they win in court and even more if they lose.

Marktheshark

Just to add, once you have agreed to "independent appeal" you can not really argue with the decision.
The time to argue is before by writing to the parking firm and rejection the choice of appeal as it is not independent and list why.
Argue the fact they refuse to use an independent appeal like POPLA removes the pofa requirement on the driver.
I am sure someone could make a template letter to send listing the sham that is IPA.

Half_way

PPC challenge letter....

Therefore for the reasons above this charge must now be canceled. I am aware that your trade association also offers a further challenge to the IAS, however I have serious concerns over the true independence and effectiveness of the IAS and should they rule against my challenge I reserve my rights to reject their findings.

TDA

Fight_the_good_fight wrote: »

In addition to the kangaroo court system I was wondering if the PPC's have have reconfigured their contracts with the landowners to show they have jumped ship.

I imagine they won't have. BPA CoP requires that all members have it in their contracts that the landowner requires them to keep to the CoP so it should (...) be in there.

Problem is, if they haven't updated it all it means is that they are in breach of their contract with the landowner, and it will be for the landowner to decide what action they wish to take regarding that breach. It won't void the entire contract.

BenefitMaster

You should always, always appeal to the IPC/IAS, because it costs the company money win or lose.

It also proves reasonableness on your part in jumping through their hoops if (and it's a big if) they are stupid enough to try to rely on the kangaroo court judgment in the big boy courts.

Coupon-mad

BenefitMaster wrote: »

You should always, always appeal to the IPC/IAS, because it costs the company money win or lose.

It also proves reasonableness on your part in jumping through their hoops if (and it's a big if) they are stupid enough to try to rely on the kangaroo court judgment in the big boy courts.

I agree and will amend the NEWBIES thread to make that clear. I will link this thread of discussion so newbies can understand why we will be saying 'appeal even though we know you will lose'. The most important thing is to flush out this IAS as a sham (allegedly) and the best way to do that is to not help them skew the figures - we need to engage and lose and complain to the DVLA every single time.

Fight_the_good_fight

TDA thanks for the post, without the legal knowledge of civil law as the more seasoned campaigners on here I was wondering if the contract had not been re drafted to show them jumping ship would be a point of appeal under breach of contract.

I appreciate though as with every other appeal point it is going to be dismissed in this kangaroo appeal system.

However as CM and BM mention and the point of starting the thread is to obtain some conformity in advice whether it is worth appealing when knowing full well the outcome :rotfl:

For what it is worth from my humble and limited experience I believe the advice should be appeal and when the day comes in a big boy court their lack of impartiality amongst many other points can be better evidenced