Appeal refused by IAS

Simplythebeast

I am the registered keeper of a vehicle which was parked on 24/10/15 and I subsequently recieved a Parking Charge Notice 18 days later on 11/11/15 from Vehicle Control Services Ltd for overstaying a two hour period by 37 minutes.
I was not driving my vehicle at th time and excercised my right not to name the driver.
Subsequently I appealed against the PCN to the Operator and it was turned down.
I then appealed to the Independent Appeals Service on the grounds that I was not the driver and because the Operator had not conformed with the strict time requirements of PoFA the Operator was not able to recover the parking charge from the keeper but should pursue the driver.
I recieved an email at 00.20 this.morning (New Years Day) indicating that IAS had refused my appeal as the operator was relying on the case of Elliott v Loake which allows them to treat the keeper as the driver.
Further they state that "As the Operator is not relying on PoFA, that is irrelavent"
I assume they are saying they dont need to comply with the requirements of PoFA in relation to service as the are not relying on PoFA for this charge?
I am now unsure how to proceed as I would have thought that the PoFA requirements are a legally binding set of conditions which the Operator cannot ignore.?
Can anyone adivise on my next step please?

Marktheshark

I would save that evidence very safe.
Confirmation in writing that they are not complying with POFA = a very good court defence.

Also to my belief and I think an E-mail sent at such a time on New years day must surely confirm that they are using an automated software device to reply to appeals.
Do we believe Red cow yard was working with its "barristers" sat reading appeals at twenty past twelve on new years day ?

Redx

the OP has 6 years to ignore the begging letters from VCS or debt collectors and should only seek further advice if they receive official court papers (keep all correspondence received so far safe for 6 years too)

pappa_golf

Marktheshark wrote: »

I would save that evidence very safe.
Confirmation in writing that they are not complying with POFA = a very good court defence.

Also to my belief and I think an E-mail sent at such a time on New years day must surely confirm that they are using an automated software device to reply to appeals.
Do we believe Red cow yard was working with its "barristers" sat reading appeals at twenty past twelve on new years day ?

let me edit this:


do you think the Red cow gang use "barristers" ?


why should a fully fledged barrister work on trivial cases with a trivial payment

Marktheshark

pappa_golf wrote: »

let me edit this:


do you think the Red cow gang use "barristers" ?


why should a fully fledged barrister work on trivial cases with a trivial payment

Their claim not mine....:rotfl:

salmosalaris

So you are basically being called a liar in them relying on Elliott v Loake

You either ignore anything now other than a letter before action or court claim which is unlikely .

Or you could send VCS this

Dear VCS
Re PCN xxxxx

I have received the blatantly incorrrect adjudication from your apparently independent appeals service .I will not be paying your demand other than in the vanishingly small chance that I am ordered to by a Court order .
I have informed you that I was not the driver . You have failed to comply with or even attempt to comply with the strict requirements of Schedule 4 of POFA and consequently have no lawful claim against me . The case of Elliott v Loake is utterly irrelevant .
Either issue me with a letter before action as required by the Practice Direction on pre action conduct or cancel your charge . I do not expect to receive any other communications from you or debt collection agencies for artificially increased amounts designed to intimidate me
I expect a reply within 7 days

(Up) yours

pappa_golf

the day they publish a list of the barristers , is the day I will believe it.


love to sit in on a court case where the people who refused the appeal are called to explain their reasons


won't happen , but its on my wish list

Half_way

salmosalaris wrote: »

So you are basically being called a liar in them relying on Elliott v Loake

You either ignore anything now other than a letter before action or court claim which is unlikely .

Or you could send VCS this

Dear VCS
Re PCN xxxxx

I have received the blatantly incorrrect adjudication from your apparently independent appeals service .I will not be paying your demand other than in the vanishingly small chance that I am ordered to by a Court order .
I have informed you that I was not the driver . You have failed to comply with or even attempt to comply with the strict requirements of Schedule 4 of POFA and consequently have no lawful claim against me . The case of Elliott v Loake is utterly irrelevant .
Either issue me with a letter before action as required by the Practice Direction on pre action conduct or cancel your charge . I do not expect to receive any other communications from you or debt collection agencies for artificially increased amounts designed to intimidate me
I expect a reply within 7 days

(Up) yours

Add in a section that the IAS has failed to meet the requirements as laid out in the Alternate Dispute Resolution for Consumer contracts regulations 20015 and as such you are formally rejecting the findings of this kangaroo court.
Also copy the landowner in on this, and tell them in no uncertain terms that unless they or their agents produce court papers immediately you will be charging the landowner who took on VCS £19 per hour or part thereof for dealing with any of their letters.

And if you know the landowner, dont forget to repeat the message on social media ( if you have access to it)

Half_way

One more thing to add, "Appeal refused/rejected by IAS" is to be expected, just as it gets dark at night an light in the morning.

However to play the IAS you need to get a perverse judgement, and then to tell the PPC/IAS/Landowner (or ideally all parties) that you reject the findings from the red cor lot/Will Hurley as they dont comply with the ADR regulations.
In an ideal world you should get in to the landowner/PPC/IAs at the start telling them that you will only accept an ADR regulation complaint appeals service
the parking prankster has more on the non compliance by William Hurley/IAS/Gladstones/couldn't give a flying [censored] here http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/the-independent-appeals-service-ias-has.html

Coupon-mad

Why did you bother with IAS?

The guidance here in the NEWBIES thread post #3, tells you you would lose.

Now you feel very much on the back foot, looking for the next step when in fact, you should never have taken the IAS step.

I am now unsure how to proceed... Can anyone advise on my next step please?

This ^^^ABOVE^^^ is precisely why I tell people not to bother to hand the PPC the potential and perceived advantage of an IAS win. Of course you are unsure - IAS was not a good plan and you are now feeling what all Newbies would feel who try IAS unless they were expecting a loss and were ready for that. Better not to engage with the IPC service at all.

But all is not lost. You are still at 'ignore the debt collectors' stage (see post #4 of the NEWBIES thread) as you would have been if you'd side-stepped IAS but the PPC will be buoyed by the win. VCS rarely try court so collect the letter chain and come back if they try a small claim.

If you really, really aren't comfortable doing nothing (which is what you should have done instead of IAS stage!) try a mix of salmosalaris' and Half_way's suggestions as ONE single response. DO NOT enter into any further correspondence beyond that and do not phone them. BTW, any response will not stop the letter chain so go into this with your eyes open this time. The only reason to write is to say your piece and appear reasonable later on, if you end up defending a small claim.

And please no updates about debt collector letters. Pretty please.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/64350600#Comment_64350600

Read the links in the NEWBIES thread post #4 (above link) and Google the letters but please, do not tell us about them. Too many thousand threads about them already.

Redx

some people follow the old advice issued by people like deeperanddeeper who thinks its better to get an ill-written judgment, whereas people like prankster and others think "dont bother with a kangaroo court system, refuse to participate in it and request an alternative ADR instead"

I go with the latter, some like him go with their own arguments, although I can see both sides I personally would never appeal to the IAS and would go down the alternative ADR routes or go with the old adage of defending the case in front of a judge as is my right to do