excel parking

Guys_Dad

bazster wrote: »

Tricky isn't it? On the one hand there is merit in collecting evidence that the IAS is bent, both for the individual case and wider, but on the other hand there's merit in undermining the IAS by submitting as few appeals as possible.

Very difficult to say which is the better way of dealing with it.

On balance, presenting evidence of the completely biased, "guilty in spite of real law, failure to follow CoP guidelines etc" rejections from IAS just might infuriate some judges who may be sticklers for proper justice.

So, whilst agreeing that there are good arguments on both sides, showing any court that you have gone through all the pre-court stages of appeal so as to try not to "waste the court's valuable time" but receiving only a clearly biased adjudication that turns English law on its head can only be a positive thing, I would suggest.

Redx

I agree with that scenario as well, for those who wish to try it

which then becomes

wait for NTK, then appeal the NTK (if its not a leased/hired/company car)

appeal to the IAS

if neither work, follow the IGNORE route for 6 years EXCEPT for an LBC or an MCOL

a complaint to the landowner should always be tried too, although Peel holdings never care and never do anything about it

The_Deep

I agree with GD, appeal, and if it is rejected, and the rejection is based on IAS Micky Mouse Law, they will be most unlikely to want you to produce it in court.

An "Independent Adjudication" which is not only not independent, but also anonymous, is likely to hole the PPC below the water line.