Excel members of IAS, but using PoPLA PCN?

Umkomaas

Have you contacted the Patient Advice and Liaison Services (PALS)? They are pretty good, if you get them on-side, at fighting these on the patient's behalf.

Bobbydazzler

Thanks Uk,

Yes that was the 1st avenue I/we tried to go down but apparently the hospital in question did not have said officer.

We were pointed in the direction of the Patient Experience Team.

They gave info to the trusts land manager who was duly contacted.

There was a few names but only 1 answered and another has moved on,

I feel really bad for RK as I gave him the confidence to tackle the PPC head on but now the trust are on their side it seems.

I'm worried I have now got him a bigger charge

Umkomaas

Have you tried a Freedom of Information (FOI) request as per Fergie76 (forum search) who has given the hospital trust a real shallacking? I'm sure he will join in with you and advise once you get this underway.

Bobbydazzler

Umkomaas wrote: »

Have you tried a Freedom of Information (FOI) request as per Fergie76 (forum search) who has given the hospital trust a real shallacking? I'm sure he will join in with you and advise once you get this underway.

No will go and have a look now.

Thanks Umk, great advice as always :beer:

Bobbydazzler

I've had a good read and very eye opening it is too. It will be valuable to fight this case I think.

So again thanks Umk.

I have now spent a considerable length of time drafting a letter to the trusts land manager after he gave me some I think valuable information via email?

He states that the trust are looking into their use of this company and the drop off bays available at this site.

Is this not an admission there are issues with both?

The letter I have wrote is an essay and I'm unsure as to whether to send it. How do the regulars feel about going through it as I may get myself into trouble :-) LOL

bod1467

If it's like an essay then it's too long and too emotive. Short, sharp, to-the-point (bullets to identify the key issues) would be far more likely to gain a positive result. (i.e. it's more likely to be read for a start).

Bobbydazzler

bod1467 wrote: »

If it's like an essay then it's too long and too emotive. Short, sharp, to-the-point (bullets to identify the key issues) would be far more likely to gain a positive result. (i.e. it's more likely to be read for a start).

Point taken Bod but I feel the need to point out all of the injustices on show here.

The emails I have received are dismissive and to be honest disrespectful, but the main reason is I dont want to land myself or RK in hot water

After reading Fergie's posts I'm not alone and it looks like standard practice no matter which trust it is.

Hopefully Fergie will see this thread and join in Any advice is more than welcome, from any member

Bobbydazzler

Right I will do my best to keep to bullet points

1, Pregnant women should be given special consideration under the EA 2010

2, Excel Signs are misleading (BPA logo's present)

3, PCN old paper as still quoting POPLA as appeal not IAS (again misleading)

4 Not a GPEOL all parking bays free. So not trying to save a couple of quid by parking in BB bay

5, Excel not the Landowners and there fore cannot issue said charges as no contract was made by RK or Driver.

6 Disabled bay signs weather worn to the point you cant see disabled symbol. Same with floor paint worn out and not clear.

I can see your point better now Bod no need for the ranting lol

What do you think good case?

hoohoo

Number 6 is imho, the only relevant one. Number 5 might be, depending on signage. Number 4 needs to wait for the supreme court

HO87

You haven't detailed what it is that the car park attendant was supposed to have done. However, we know that in similar cases (involving both Excel and its sister company VCS) attendants have simply allowed people to walk into tickets by failing to warn them when to have done so was the obvious thing to do.

Are Excel alleging that their charge is a contractual fee or a payment in breach of contract? In other words are they saying that the PCN is a means of collecting a charge you have agreed to pay by parking or a payment because you have breached their terms and conditions by failing to P&D, or whatever? If it is the latter then they may well have fallen foul of the requirement that they mitigate their loss (which they are obliged to do) - something that their sister company, VCS, have famously tripped over before. In a case heard some 3 years ago Judge McIlwaine at Scun.thorpe warned VCS's representative that if she continue with a particular line he would adjourn the case and advise her to bring her toothbrush with her when it was reconvened. I attach the case transcript - as much for entertainment - although it could be relevant.