IAS Template and a question about landowner

steve806

Hi All


Received a Contractual Payment Charge of £100 for failure to display ticket on dash (it fell off while away from car) in a Brighton car park enforced by Sussex Security Solutions.


Appealed and received standard letter response declining appeal and advising I can now appeal to IAS.


Can anyone direct me to a template? Also, am I correct in assuming appeal is not in relation to failure to display but GPEOL, lack of contract, lack of signage?


Finally, read somewhere that it can be effective to write to the landowner appealing to them and by doing so making them aware I understand how these cases work and they are in for a fight. Is this worth doing?


Any guidance greatly appreciated.


kind regards


Steve

enfield_freddy

who did you appeal to , sussex parking solutions , or the other company called parking enforcement.org.uk?




and I hope you read the terms and conditions allowing them to take you to court?


Please read and tick 'I agree' to the Terms & Conditions below *
I confirm that all the information I have provided is true and I understand any false information may be used against me in court. Should my appeal be rejected and I later refuse payment in the specified time allowed. I allow Parking Enforcement to start issuing court proceedings against myself and the address I have provided. Parking Enforcement is registered with the ICO and all information will be confidential in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998.

steve806

Hi Freddy


The appeal was to parking enforcement.


I don't recall seeing that statement on the online appeal I completed.


If I have ticked agreeing to those terms will it affect my appeal?

enfield_freddy

not realy , just pointing it out to show how devious those people are , here's the appeals page http://parkingenforcement.org.uk/appeal/


the chance of winning an appeal with the "kangaroo court (IPC) are slim , however there comments are worth gold , should the muppets try court.

The_Deep

There is no template as thgis is a contractuasl charge as opposed to a claim for damages arising out of a breach Of Contract, ergo GPEOL does not apply. However, they must charge v.a.t. If their paperwork makes no mention of it is probably Breech of contract and GPEOL does apply.

Ask them for a vat invoice if they refuse shop them to taxevasion hotline.

Further reading

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5195437=

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5087925=

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5033796=

ColliesCarer

Hi Steve806,

As already mentioned there are no template appeals for IAS
Each one needs to be bespoke, however, similar legal arguments still apply.

A thread to capture successful IAS appeals was started - unfortunately the forum hasn't seen many of those but there is some useful in the thread

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5052217

see post #40 which links to a thread containing a successful appeal (but against PCM Ltd) which might give you some ideas what to check and some arguments to include.

e.g. POFA 2012 Sched 4 - NtK must still be compliant with that

See the IPC web site for details of the Code of Practise for IPC operators

Check signage and Ntk for any wording that indicates the charge is actually for breach and not a contractual charge

e.g. Does your NtK use these words "Contractual Payment Charge of £100 for failure to display ticket"

- if so they are referring to breach, failure to comply - so No GPEOL would still apply - breach charging models are not allowed in IPC

Put together your draft and post here for comment is you want futher help with it

enfield_freddy

there website claims contractual charge

ColliesCarer

enfield_freddy wrote: »

there website claims contractual charge

and your point is ......?

It's what's on the signs and the NtK that matter more

steve806

Colliecarer,


The ticket is headed Contractual Payment Charge.


The first Line of this charge states:


The Enforcement Officer had reason to believe that the following breach of terms and conditions displayed had occurred and that a contractual payment charge is now payable.


Don't know if it is relevant but the appeal notice given with the ticket uses different language. It states:


A vehicle we believe was infraction of the car park regulations you have the right to the challenge the notice given.


Further down it refers to a 'fixed charge notice'.


Will be taking photos of signage tomorrow and drafting appeal

ColliesCarer

A parking charge is either consideration (a fee) or damages for breach of the terms. It cannot be both.

A contractual charge is a fee - a tariff payable for doing something that is permitted i.e. a charge payable within the terms and conditions that were supposedly accepted and it doesn't have to be a genuine pre-estimate of loss - it can be any amount the company says it is. So if the signs say the price for parking here for up to 2 hours is £100 then that is a contractual charge. It is also subject to VAT because it is revenue.

But Consideration, i.e. a fee, cannot be applied for doing something that is not permitted - i.e. breaching the terms

A charge for breaching the terms is an amount claimed in damages for having done something not allowed and this has to be a GPEOL because damages must be a genuine pre estimate of the loss that could reasonably have been incurred by the breach - no profit is allowed. i.e. I've lost £y because you did this so you owe me £y. Not £y X 10.

So say I book an appointment with a chiropractor who charge £25 a 30 minute session and I either don't turn up then the max they could charge me is £25 for the lost appointment not £100 because that wouldn't equal their loss.

So although they might claim their charge is a contractual one the following statement "The Enforcement Officer had reason to believe that the following breach of terms and conditions displayed had occurred and that a contractual payment charge is now payable." gives lie to their claim it is a contractual fee - it is not a contractual sum it is a disguised breach of terms - if I breached their conditions - they can only claim damages. A contractual charge would be within the terms and conditions.

In addition the words "A vehicle we believe was infraction of the car park regulations also shows their charge is actually for breach.

Charges using the words infraction, failing to comply etc etc, indicate breach and must be a genuine pre estimate of loss. Charges for breach are not allowed in the IPC model.

bazster

enfield_freddy wrote: »

who did you appeal to , sussex parking solutions , or the other company called parking enforcement.org.uk?




and I hope you read the terms and conditions allowing them to take you to court?


Please read and tick 'I agree' to the Terms & Conditions below *
I confirm that all the information I have provided is true and I understand any false information may be used against me in court. Should my appeal be rejected and I later refuse payment in the specified time allowed. I allow Parking Enforcement to start issuing court proceedings against myself and the address I have provided. Parking Enforcement is registered with the ICO and all information will be confidential in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998.

What a load of meaningless carp. No-one needs someone else's permission to bring a court claim against them!

As if St John Capon is going to bring a court claim anyway!