Hope appeal to IAS will win this time as before

Darrenjo

I too have had an appeal rejected today with one of the disputed points being I was not driver

The following was reply from IAS

"2. The Appellant accepts being the keeper but has not named the driver. They do not have to do this, but I am entitled to infer from this silence that they are the driver and I do infer it. Therefore, PoFA is irrelevant"

Funny thing is that the photo was male and I'm a female

Technics

The IPC's code of practice states that they will investigate complaints regarding non-compliance of members. Have them investigate the PPC's failure to provide an independent appeal.

Fergie76

Darrenjo wrote: »

I too have had an appeal rejected today with one of the disputed points being I was not driver

The following was reply from IAS

"2. The Appellant accepts being the keeper but has not named the driver. They do not have to do this, but I am entitled to infer from this silence that they are the driver and I do infer it. Therefore, PoFA is irrelevant"

Funny thing is that the photo was male and I'm a female

Complain to the DVLA that they are not providing an independent appeals service and to anyone else who will listen.

Technics

More quotes from the IPC CoP:

"The IPC may investigate any matter, of its own volition, or as a result of a complaint."

"The IPC will investigate, at the DVLA's request, any complaint against it's members regarding a breaches of the Code of Practice."

waamo

Fergie76 wrote: »

Complain to the DVLA that they are not providing an independent appeals service and to anyone else who will listen.

I agree this needs to reported to the DVLA.

Sassii

Zero_Gravitas wrote: »

Just for completeness, could you post your original successful appeal and the response from the IAS assessor on this thread, so there's evidence in one place of the inconsistency of the IAS.

Thanks,

ZG.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4977929

Herzlos

Sassii wrote: »

2. I have not considered this, as PoFA only relates to claims against the keeper. Given the Appellant’s refusal to name the driver I am inferring they are the driver and PoFA is no longer relevant.

4. Loss is not relevant. The contractual terms make clear that if a driver parks outside of a marked bay or without a permit they agree to pay the charge. Once the driver has agreed to pay the Appellant does not have to prove anything.

5. In this appeal the onus is on the Appellant to prove their claims. The Operator does not have to prove anything.

6. Having considered the evidence I am satisfied there are sufficient number of signs, that they are clear and provided sufficient notice.

I'd love to see what'd happen if they used any of those in a court.

There's is no way they can infer from what you said who the driver was. You didn't even refuse to name the driver, you just said you were appealing as keeper which is perfectly valid whether or not they satisfy POFA 2012.

I'd also be making a huge deal of the fact an identical appeal for identical circumstances can result in wildy different outcomes - not only are they not independent, they aren't even consistent.

Fruitcake

Darrenjo wrote: »

I too have had an appeal rejected today with one of the disputed points being I was not driver

The following was reply from IAS

"2. The Appellant accepts being the keeper but has not named the driver. They do not have to do this, but I am entitled to infer from this silence that they are the driver and I do infer it. Therefore, PoFA is irrelevant"

Funny thing is that the photo was male and I'm a female

Fergie76 wrote: »

Complain to the DVLA that they are not providing an independent appeals service and to anyone else who will listen.

As above. Complain to the DVLA and send pictures of you, the keeper, with the PPC picture of the driver plus the rejection letter.

Half_way

if your feeling up for it a complaint to the dvla and a request for your info under the dpa to the ias may turn up some more information

Darrenjo

Thanks for advice i may well complain. The appeal decision didnt seem very independant and onus / blame was certainly directed towards me.

I will open new thread that shows all points disputed and responses given