G24 Appeal

liamruairi

Hi all, first time poster so please any advice appreciated! I have read the newbies section, and thoroughly researched all other relevant pages and threads about G24.
I got a PCN from them today about a parking find at Wickes (free parking for 90 mins - I overstayed 16 mins). Fine is for £100 now as reduced time has passed. Letter was delivered outside the 14 day reduced rate period. I tried to appeal online but when I entered everything in; it said 'an error occurred when processing your request'. The 28 day period is tomorrow. So, I'm printing it off and posting is 1st class recorded so they hopefully get it in time. This was my letter below; now I play the waiting game; any advice on what I should do to prepare for the next thing that happens? Does my letter look ok?

Dear G24,

This is an appeal against the charge issued to the vehicle with the registration **********, charge reference number **********
I challenge this 'PCN' as keeper of the car and I will complain to the landowner about the matter if it is not cancelled.

The registered keeper is appealing against this charge and it is the registered keeper’s assertion that:

1. The charge is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss.

2. The photographic ‘evidence’ provided does not show the vehicle in question parked for the amount of time stated; simply arriving and leaving at 2 particular points in time.

3. The PCN was received by the registered keeper on 20/6/2016. This was 27 days after the issue date. This is in contravention of the ‘Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, SCHEDULE 4 Recovery of unpaid parking charges section 56.’ Paragraph 9, section 4(b) which states that:

“The notice must be given by—(…) sending it by post to a current address for service for the keeper so that it is delivered to that address within the relevant period.
(5)
The relevant period for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4) is the period of 14 days beginning with the day after that on which the specified period of parking ended.”

The PCN is to be cancelled due to lack of compliance with this legislation.

3. The signage does not conform to the BPA CoP to which G24 has committed. I believe that your signs fail the test of 'large lettering' and prominence, as established in ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis. Your unremarkable and obscure signs were not seen by the driver, are in very small print and the terms are not readable to drivers before they park.

4. G24 has no authority to issue charges over the land in question, and that your interest in the land is not sufficient to offer contracts. Further, I understand you do not own the car park and you have given me no information about your policy with the landowner or on site businesses, to cancel such a charge. Information pertaining to that policy is required under the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013. I believe the driver is eligible for cancellation and you have omitted clear information about the process for complaints including a geographical address of the landowner.

5. That you have not entered into a valid contract with the driver.

6. That you have not complied with all strict requirements of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 to constitute Keeper Liability against me.

7. That you have not submitted a valid VAT invoice detailing VAT applicable charges.

As such the charge is rejected. You should now either cancel said charge or provide a POPLA code for the registered keeper to appeal to the independent adjudicator.

Any further correspondence other than confirmation of cancellation or a POPLA code will be considered harassment and could result in legal action being taken against you.

Yours faithfully,
(registered keeper's name)

Redx

remove the car details and pcn number from the above

no identifying details at all

the newbies sticky thread has the initial challenge to G24 (IPC template)

then ignore G24 and any debt collectors after that, for 6 years

its only an LBC or MCOL you would reply to, after your initial template appeal

G24 wont issue POPLA codes as they are an IPC member

read the sticky threads again, more carefully this time

liamruairi

Thanks Redx, I read it thoroughly. I thought I could improve my chances by improving the letter. G24 are BPA members so should also use the POPLA codes. On their website it clearly states they are proud accreditors of the BPA so why can't I request that? If they're a member of both where does that leave me?

Redx

they are members of both , corporate members, but your arguments are flawed

they subscribe to the IPC AOS (check the IPC website) so only use the IAS for appeals, not POPLA (the logos are different shapes etc)

think of it like bank accounts, you may have 2 , one with santander and one with the halifax, but your salary and all direct debits are with the halifax, so nothing to do with santander if you have a query

so forget the BPA, forget POPLA too

its IPC and IAS and has been for a longggggggggggggggg time

liamruairi

Ah ok great thanks, That's great.

Redx

see here , 01/10/2014

https://www.theipc.info/aos-members/g

so over 18 months and coming up on 2 years

its unlikey that G24 will cancel the invoice no matter what you say

complain to WICKES in the strongest possible terms and get it cancelled by the landowner, asap, thats your best option, especially if you have receipts or bank statements showing patronage

fizzo_65

I am confused. From the research I have done it seems we should ignore parking "fines" from G24 as they are not enforceable. Why then would we write the letter shown as a template on newbies sticky thread to appeal? I am confused as to what to do, ignore or send letter. Please help.

Ralph-y

fizzo 65, hi and welcome to the forum

please read the newbies thread

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4816822

it will explain much

"From the research I have done it seems we should ignore parking "fines" from G24 as they are not enforceable"

then your research is wrong!

re read the newbie thread a bit at a time till it makes sense

oh and if you are using a phone to browse .... a PC/laptop will much improve things ....

oh and start a new thread ... this is some one else's thread


http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/forumdisplay.php?f=163

top left new thread button

good luck

Ralph:cool:

Redx

fizzo_65 wrote: »

I am confused. From the research I have done it seems we should ignore parking "fines" from G24 as they are not enforceable. Why then would we write the letter shown as a template on newbies sticky thread to appeal? I am confused as to what to do, ignore or send letter. Please help.

wrong, for england and wales you should always appeal to the PPC, then ignore if they are in the IPC as its biased towards the ppc (additionally appeal through popla for BPA members only)

IGNORE has never been correct , especially not since oct 2012 due to POFA2012

who says they are not enforceable ? you ? the court ? , who ?

in the Beavis case it was enforced, 3 times in 3 different courts, with about 11 judges presiding in total

you would appeal (send the appeal letter) to show a judge you have tried to settle the matter or deal with the matter IF it ever goes to court in the next 6 years

Umkomaas

Record of G24 court claims from some 200,000 tickets issued in the past 2.5 years? Read here:

http://www.bmpa.eu/companydata/G24.html

Can't guarantee it will never happen, but it does take a degree of intellectual capacity to effectively pursue a county court case! :cool:

Coupon-mad

fizzo_65 wrote: »

I am confused. From the research I have done it seems we should ignore parking "fines" from G24 as they are not enforceable. Why then would we write the letter shown as a template on newbies sticky thread to appeal? I am confused as to what to do, ignore or send letter. Please help.

It is pointless to do second stage appeal with a IPC firm but we do recommend not ignoring completely. The reason being, when ParkingEye crawled out from under their stone with a shiny new Legal Department in 2013, the cases they suddenly swooped down and cherry-picked for the first court claims were...ignorers.

Other PPCs who are litigious, also seem to like to pick ignorers because they are more likely to get default CCJs as trophies and/or to extort money later when the person finds they have got a surprise CCJ stopping them moving house or taking out a new phone contract, borrowing money from a bank, etc. Much easier than trying to sue someone with a grasp of the issues.

Now, G24 do not sue people. But 4 years ago we'd have said the same about ParkingEye. So, we advise being visible and robust with a challenge from the keeper in every case, to set the scene as a non-victim. Do not be the 'low-hanging fruit' later. Not that we expect G24 to ever do anything but we can't promise!

ALWAYS complain to the retailers. Then complain to the retailers again. Then try the landowner and/or managing agent. Then complain AGAIN.