Napier parking charge

Rynemgar

I understand that I am not supposed to name the driver. In this case, it actually wasn't me!
I received a Fixed Charge Notice from Napier Parking on the 13th September.
My initial thoughts on this were that the person observing can't possibly have had time to check if anyone was at the ticket machines!
The letter states: Observed between (period of parking).
They observed for less than a minute before the ticket was issued.
What do I do? I read the Newbie thread and it said if it was from Napier, I needed to open my new thread.

Thanks in advance for the help! I'm just sorry my first post is asking for help!

Fruitcake

Send them the IPC template letter from the NEWBIES thread then ignore anything and everything else you get for the next six years unless it is real court papers.

pappa_golf

maybe ask them why they have failed to comply with the terms in the IPC code of conduct ,


15. Grace Periods
15.1 Drivers should be allowed a sufficient amount of time to park and read any signs so
they may make an informed decision as to whether or not to remain on the site.
15.2 Drivers should be allowed a sufficient amount of time to leave a site after a pre-paid or
permitted period of parking has expired

The_Deep

They derliberately post times as they do so that when you come on here they can identify you.

Coupon-mad

The_Deep wrote: »

They deliberately post times as they do so that when you come on here they can identify you.

Indeed they do - those specific seconds are to identify people online. Those figures are not the actual observation time.

@Rynemgar, edit your first post, you have just identified yourself to a notoriously nastily aggressive and litigious parking firm. Napier's signs are often rubbish with over 3000 words in their entrance signs for a start - but you won't win at IAS stage.

Read the NEWBIES thread about IPC appeals, send the template challenge as 'keeper' saying you were not driving - and see what transpires. Napier may end up suing or they may not but at least you'd get a fair hearing and could show unfairness/no grace period. Trouble is, I expect the person was seen walking away, that's what Napier do best (apparently/allegedly, they hide and watch people leave).

Willen Lakes?

Rynemgar

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Indeed they do - those specific seconds are to identify people online. Those figures are not the actual observation time.

Edit your first post, you have just identified yourself to a notoriously nastily aggressive and litigious parking firm. Napier's signs are often rubbish with over 3000 words in their entrance signs for a start - but you won't win at IAS stage.

Read the NEWBIES thread about IPC appeals, send the template challenge as 'keeper' saying you were not driving - and see what transpires.

I have edited, but first responder quoted it before edit. Is that gunna be an issue?
I read Newbie thread, have now got the letter sorted, will just have to print and send.

Coupon-mad

Click on Fruitcake's username and send them a little message asking if they can please edit their post to remove the quote.

The whole thing will be something of an issue. Napier will reject the appeal, then DO NOT try IAS. After that, possibly they might sue.

Rynemgar

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Click on Fruitcake's username and send them a little message asking if they can please edit their post to remove the quote.

The whole thing will be something of an issue. Napier will reject the appeal, then DO NOT try IAS. After that, possibly they might sue.

So what do I do?
Do I send the IPC letter template?
What then?

The_Deep

My advise to to make an IAS appeal. The resulting anonymous adjudication will fall so far short of a fair and balanced decision, so flawed and partial towards their ATA owners, that I very much doubt if Mr de Savery will wish it to be shown to a judge.

Rynemgar

The_Deep wrote: »

My advise to to make an IAS appeal. The resulting anonymous adjudication will fall so far short of a fair and balanced decision that I very much doubt if Mr de Savery will wish it to be shown to a judge.

God i'm so confused... I've got you saying do IAS, I've got another saying DO NOT do IAS....

ratechaser

Rynemgar wrote: »

God i'm so confused... I've got you saying do IAS, I've got another saying DO NOT do IAS....

'To IAS or not to IAS' is a common debate between m'learned experts on this forum (I'm not one of them, just an avid observer since my own PCN issue a few months back).

Basically it goes a bit like this - The Deep takes the view that IAS appeals are so flawed in their reasoning, that it actually helps your case if it ever gets to a real court; in that you can produce their nonsensical rejection as evidence of this whole thing being a scam, but also of your willingness to engage in the 'process'

Whereas Coupon Mad and others take the view that it's a waste of energy as its not a fair appeal process, and losing at IPC will make a lot of people give in and pay the scammers because it creates the illusion that they have had a fair hearing.

(Hope I've not misrepresented you too much!)

I'm staying on the fence myself!