PCM parking ticket appeal rejected - Help appeal to IAS

jkmuk

This is about a parking ticket issued recently for parking at the doorstep of my friends place. A ticket was issued stating that the car was "parked within a restricted area". This was a private site. There was signage at the site, however it was raining that night and the signage was not readable. The letters were tiny and will rain drops all over making it impossible to make out what was being said. I do have a picture of it. I appealed to PCM (Parking Control Management) on that basis (as a registered keeper of the vehicle). The grounds of appeal was that 1. The ticket was illegal as the signage was not clear 2. the demand of £100 was not fair. The appeal was rejected. The evidence attached by PCM shows a very clear signage (too clear for a rainy night) which I believe has been doctored in some way as the picture that I took shows clearly that the signage is un-readable.

I now am planning to appeal to IAS as that is the option provided in my rejection letter. The rejection letter states two points 1. I was in violation (i.e parked in the restricted space) 2. That the £100 is fair as it is a contractual agreement and that a contract had been entered into. It notes all signs were clear which clearly was not the case. Can someone tell me what my chances are for wining this appeal. What other steps could I take to make a strong case? Below is a link to the unclear signage picture that I took

--- (New user not allowed to post link) any other way to so it? ---

What are the requirements around signage ? I believe the letters are too small even on a clear day could this also be a basis for appeal?

bazster

You have no chance of winning, the appeal service is a sham.

Hot_Bring

Personally, and there will be those that disagree, I'd suggest it is an utter waste of time appealing to the non-independent, kangaroo court, IAS. Given the PPC that issued the fake invoice I'd just ignore them .... unless you get real court papers ... then come back here.

The_Deep

As it is a contractual charge v.a.t. may well be payable. Ask for a v.a.t. invoice "in order that you may pass it to your your accountant for payment"

More reading

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/...7925&highlight=

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/...3796&highlight=

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/...5195437&page=4

nigelbb

jkmuk wrote: »

The rejection letter states two points 1. I was in violation (i.e parked in the restricted space) 2. That the £100 is fair as it is a contractual agreement and that a contract had been entered into.

PCM cannot have it both ways. I's either a violation or it's a contract. You cannot enter into a contract to do something that is forbidden i.e. park within a restricted area.

jkmuk

nigelbb wrote: »

PCM cannot have it both ways. I's either a violation or it's a contract. You cannot enter into a contract to do something that is forbidden i.e. park within a restricted area.

Well I am not able to post the actual letters (is there any way around it for a newbie)

It does say that by parking in that site a contract was entered into and that the driver agrees to pay the charges stated there in by parking. This was in response to my statement in the appeal that their pre-estimation of £100 was incorrect as the parking charges in that area were not more than a £5 (a very generous estimation)

I am willing to fight this tooth and nail even if it costs me more than the fine, because clearly the sign was not readable and they (PCM) claiming that the signs are right using a false/incorrect photo is a blatant lie. I just need the right support from senior members so that I do this right and hurt them where it means the most for the benefit of all innocent motorists.

bazster

Well I repeat, our experience is that appealing to the IAS kangaroo court is a waste of time, it is not independent and is rigged against you.

Since they are saying it is a contractual charge you could fight back by:

- demanding a VAT invoice and telling them you can't even consider paying until you've received one

- writing to them telling them that you are cancelling the contract under the terms of the The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013.

There are those on here who claim these regulations cannot be used because you can't cancel a completed contract, but they are wrong: the regulations clearly provide that the contract can be cancelled for up to a year after being entered into if (i) the trader didn't obtain your express consent to begin performance of the contract during the statutory cancellation period and/or (ii) the trader didn't provide the prescribed information regarding your right to cancel. Whether the contract has been completed is irrelevant, in fact the legislation expressly states that the right to cancel is lost only if the "fully performed" service was supplied in response to an express request from the consumer.

The main issue with using these regs is whether the parking "contract" is indeed a distance contract, and I would argue that it is (it's not entered into on the trader's premises, and there is no simultaneous presence of both the trader and the consumer). However, no court has yet considered the matter AFAIK.

Another issue to be aware of is that the driver supposedly entered into the contract so only the driver can cancel it i.e. exercising the right to cancel would entail outing yourself as driver.

The_Deep

In my opinion, not shared by many I will admit, v.a.t. is the key, if the PPC has a turnover in excess of £75,000, (which is not a large amount), they must account for v.a.t. to be able to claim contractual amount.

If they do not/will not, their claim falls to be considered as liquidated damages for trespass/breach of contract, with all that implies.

salmosalaris

My personal opinion is that appealing is futile . Very few IPC claims are going to court so the chances of it doing so are slim if you ignore it .
However if you are more proactive you can also make life more difficult for them should they try it on .
Write stating that you have reason to doubt that the IAS is fully independent but even if you do decide to apoeal to the PPC or IAS you understand that it has to be on points of law. It is therefore only reasonable and fundamental to any appeal that you know what legal basis their charge is based on . Ask them is it either damages fror breach of contract ( and if so you wish them to itemise their loss ) or a contractual sum for the supply of parking ( in which case you require a valid VAT invoice )

This places them in a Morton's fork and starts to lay a trail of you dealing with the matter reasonably .
Explain that without the required information you are unable to consider an appeal or payment and hence will consider the matter closed
You could also ask them to enclose some information about the IAS , address , details of adjudicators etc to enable you to make an informed judgment as to its independence .

jkmuk

Another questions... there has been no Notice to the Keeper (NTK) . The two communications are so far 1. the ticket on the windscreen and 2. A letter rejecting my appeal by PCM. Does any of this constitute a NTK? When is a NTK normally issued?

bazster

jkmuk wrote: »

Another questions... there has been no Notice to the Keeper (NTK) . The two communications are so far 1. the ticket on the windscreen and 2. A letter rejecting my appeal by PCM. Does any of this constitute a NTK? When is a NTK normally issued?

You will not get a NtK if you responded to the Notice to Driver. However, they can't pursue you as keeper unless they have sent a compliant NtK, so this is a loophole that can be exploited if things go further.

There's no point in appealing to the IAS on this basis though because Skippy the IAS assessor will simply say that he presumes you were the driver.