Napier/IAS Experience, 2016

thedrumdoctor

Herzlos wrote: »

Personally, I'd still fight them, but I can see it being a lot easier for most people to just pay up (and never use their car parks again).

I did give her the option to ignore and go through the nasty letters but there's no way she had the nerve to hold out worrying about whether the small claims letter would come.

thedrumdoctor

I wish I'd seen the Napier posts back at the end of July but as stated in another reply, the search on here produced no results whatsover. It was on the other threads I saw on other sites that painted a picture of doom when challenging Napier through the IAS and making the suggestions that Napier followed through with small claims, including the case where the defendent ended up with the £800+ judgement against him. I suppose my relative could still choose to ignore (she has until 11th Sept to pay up) but I know she doesn't want to go down that route. If I could GUARANTEE we had a chance of winning in court I'd have said "ignore" but she doesn't want it hanging over her.

thedrumdoctor

The_Deep wrote: »

As IAS adjudications are fatally flawed, I would urge everyone to appeal. Then, if the PPC takes the matter to court, the anonymous adjudication can form part of the defence in that the PPC does not offer and independent appeal process as required by POFA.

But what about the other side of the arguement I was reading on Pepipoo that was suggesting that the IAS will find in favour of the Op thus giving the Op an upper hand in court so don't bother using the IAS when offered? Yes, I agree the IAS is massively flawed, but then if it goes to small claims, the defence we have to offer would have to be based around proving that the IAS are not biased etc and a fair adjudication was never received. That's a mighty task for a layperson to take on, even with advice from say, the Parking Prankster guide you can buy online. I don't think I could have done it on my own.

Herzlos

The IAS will pretty much always favour the operator, but their reasoning is so bent that you can counter it pretty easily in court, if they were bold enough to cite any of it.

hoohoo

The_Deep wrote: »

As IAS adjudications are fatally flawed, I would urge everyone to appeal. Then, if the PPC takes the matter to court, the anonymous adjudication can form part of the defence in that the PPC does not offer and independent appeal process as required by POFA.


I am pretty sure that OP is not a Napier employee, read his/her previous posts.

The IAS have two appeals systems.

In their non-standards appeal system, the keeper pays £15 (non-refundable even if they win) and agrees that the verdict will be binding on them, that they have no right of appeal, and cannot contest the result. They also have to pay any add-on charges the operator has come up with.

This post is about a non-standard appeal so although I often advise appealing to the IAS for similar reasons to the Deep, in this case I would go against the Deep and say DO NOT APPEAL TO THE IAS USING THE NON-STANDARD APPEAL

thedrumdoctor

I didn't know it included any add-on charges! Glad I didn't go through with it after all.

System

Glad I didn't go through with it after all.

If you see the quality of their claims paperwork, how can anyone be in any doubt of their incompetence with the IAS.

Why appeal when you know they'll mess it up and present it as legal genius.

The_Deep

But what about the other side of the arguement I was reading on Pepipoo that was suggesting that the IAS will find in favour of the Op thus giving the Op an upper hand in court so don't bother using the IAS when offered?

That is an opinion, but not one that I support. I would ask, how can an anonymous, flawed in law decision give you "the upper hand in court"?

Yes, I agree the IAS is massively flawed, but then if it goes to small claims, the defence we have to offer would have to be based around proving that the IAS are not biased etc and a fair adjudication was never received

Easy enough

That's a mighty task for a layperson to take on,

Seems easy enough to me

I don't think I could have done it on my own.

I am pretty sure I could, it is not rocket science. If it is as difficult as you say, why are they so reluctant to take anyone to court who is likely to show challenge their anonymous adjudication?

thedrumdoctor

The_Deep wrote: »

I don't think I could have done it on my own.
I am pretty sure I could, it is not rocket science. If it is as difficult as you say, why are they so reluctant to take anyone to court who is likely to show challenge their anonymous adjudication?

Fair comment, I guess for me it is fear of the unknown, having won 4 times just on appeal. There was an archived post on the Parking Prankster from the owner of Napeir responding to criticism and naturally, he pushed home his point as a landowner he had extra interest in pursuing cases through court. I have only beein in small claims once as a winning complainant and even then I found it quite daunting, even though I had the upper hand and 90+% chance of winning. I guess it's another learning curve, but in this case it's not up to me to pursue as I'm not the one facing the possibility of a visit to court. But, I may just ask her if she wants to change her mind thanks to the opinion of you guys who have more confidence than I do.

Redx

thedrumdoctor wrote: »

I wish I'd seen the Napier posts back at the end of July but as stated in another reply, the search on here produced no results whatsover.

it is worth noting that on this forum we used to advise people to disguise the name of the PPC

as in

N@ppier

N*pier

N a p i er

ETC ETC

this was to stop N@pier from using the search and finding the threads, so not surprising if you got no results , dpending on your search words