PCN Parking Fine. Lost at IAS, What next?

crooksy10

This is the reply i recieved from the IAS on asking for stated name on the Rjection.


Dear ,

Thank you for your enquiry to the Independent Appeals Service (IAS).

The Independent Adjudicators used by the IAS are practicing barristers or solicitors. All lawyers who consider appeals are expressly required under the terms of engagement to make the decision based on the evidence before them, without any influence from the parking operator, the IPC or the motorist. Adjudicator’s identities are protected so as to protect them from unwarranted adverse attention which may otherwise taint their decisions.

The IAS is unable to assist you any further with this matter.

Yours sincerely

THE IAS

IAS Logo Footer

The Independent Appeals Service
4 The Stables
Red Cow Yard
Knutsford
Cheshire
WA16 6DG

bod1467

So in other words they are a kangaroo court with no audit trail in respect of their decisions.

crooksy10

yep exactly. With no actual factual information backing up any claims.

Do i just sit back now and wait for a series of "junk mail" from them?

bod1467

I guess so. Ignore everything except an LBCCC or actual court papers from PCM. Anything from any debt collector can be ignored.

But why not also complain to your MP about the secrecy and lack of audit trail promoted by IPC/IAS? After all there is an election coming up.

The_Deep

Have you mentioned this to your landlord as, if you are being pestered by a PPC, it is his/her responsibility to take the matter up with the management company.

In any event, you can ignore this unless the PPC is daft enough to issue a court claim, which, as no-one suffered a loss, the contract which they claim you entered into is almost certainly defective, and you AST rights will more than likely grant you permit free parking.

Do you know if the charge was contractual, for a breach, or for trespass? If the former it may well attract v.a.t., did you receive a v.a.t. invoice.

You may well receive junk mail, threatening letters, begging letter, lots of red ink, but they are no worse than Readers' Digest prize draws, just keep them for six years and hope they issue court papers, when you can give them a bloody nose.

ManxRed

crooksy10 wrote: »

Adjudicator’s identities are protected so as to protect them from [STRIKE]unwarranted adverse attention which may otherwise taint their decisions[/STRIKE] justified complaints to the SRA.

Fixed that for them.

Marktheshark

crooksy10 wrote: »

This is the reply i recieved from the IAS on asking for stated name on the Rjection.


Dear ,

Thank you for your enquiry to the Independent Appeals Service (IAS).

The Independent Adjudicators used by the IAS are practicing barristers or solicitors. All lawyers who consider appeals are expressly required under the terms of engagement to make the decision based on the evidence before them, without any influence from the parking operator, the IPC or the motorist. Adjudicator’s identities are protected so as to protect them from unwarranted adverse attention which may otherwise taint their decisions.

The IAS is unable to assist you any further with this matter.

Yours sincerely

THE IAS

IAS Logo Footer

The Independent Appeals Service
4 The Stables
Red Cow Yard
Knutsford
Cheshire
WA16 6DG

That is enough to start a complaint with the SRA, they are claiming to be acting as solicitors and barristers but refusing to provide a name of any such solicitor.
That is an offence under the legal services act.
Get your compliant to the SRA, you asked, they refused.

trisontana

"the parking charge was lawfully incurred."

What law would that be then?

Aaron_Aadvark

crooksy10 wrote: »

This is the reply i recieved from the IAS on asking for stated name on the Rjection.


Dear ,

Thank you for your enquiry to the Independent Appeals Service (IAS).

The Independent Adjudicators used by the IAS are practicing barristers or solicitors. All lawyers who consider appeals are expressly required under the terms of engagement to make the decision based on the evidence before them, without any influence from the parking operator, the IPC or the motorist. Adjudicator’s identities are protected so as to protect them from unwarranted adverse attention which may otherwise taint their decisions.

The IAS is unable to assist you any further with this matter.

Yours sincerely

THE IAS

IAS Logo Footer

The Independent Appeals Service
4 The Stables
Red Cow Yard
Knutsford
Cheshire
WA16 6DG

I suggest a Subject Access Request, under the Data Protection Act 1998 is in order. It the name of the solicitor/barrister signing this is withheld then that would be an interesting development.

System

If you read this you will see how it works. It's not as if they hide it.

[Link not available as I'm a Newbie but google DVLA Consumer Forum on Private Parking Issues]

16. IPC reported that the on-line independent appeals service had been launched, ensuring no IPC input at all in terms of appeal-handling. Early figures were that c.10% of charge notice recipients appeal to the operator and then proceed to the appeals service. Of these, c.57% result in an adjudication, c.17% of which are allowed. IPC attributed this to the compliance work it carries out with the operators when they join the ATA. They also offered the view that the figures are not necessarily comparable to POPLA’s because of differences in the referral processes (e.g. those around allowing operators to withdraw their case after referral).

Why 57% and not 100%?

This is because of the "referral" process which the DVLA knows about and rolled over on.

Anyone thinking their appeal goes to an adjudicator is correct 57% of the time. The other 43% are left in the dark that Mr Genius Hurley decides if he wants them to go there.

See various DVLA documents on the matter.

Me, I'd complain like hell