Parking Charge, IPC Member, inadequate signage

behindtheeye

Hi all,

I have read through the stickied threads and I am very grateful for the wealth of useful information posted there.

I wanted to get some advice on a situation where in my opinion the ticket is completely unjustified as a result of inadequate signage.

The driver parked on a road on a business park and subsequently got a "parking charge notice" from District Enforcement on the windscreen. District Enforcement are a member of the IPC and I am aware from reading here that this is a questionable setup.

The car was parked normally at the side of the road, with no markings or yellow lines, not near a junction and not causing an obstruction. A little after the cars are parked there are automatic barriers which lead into a car park.

The justification for the ticket is apparently a sign at the start of the road. This sign is not is not visible as you drive in – I invite you to view the following photo: https://1drv.ms/i/s!Ao45qLpxXG3_gdFdYgBEOD5G2Cj8eA
The sign is strapped with cable ties to the lamppost on the left at the start of the road. As you can see, it is not visible. It is at 90 degrees to the road and the only way you would see it is if you were walking on the road. There are no such signs in the part of the road where the cars are actually parked (which you can see in the distance). I do have lots of other photos of the area too.

Here is a close-up photo of the sign: https://1drv.ms/i/s!Ao45qLpxXG3_gdFbxTwDcICLGJJS1A

The reason given on the ticket is "Parking in the no parking area".

I don't know if this is a new arrangement but I think it is worth mentioning that every single car around the one I refer to here also had these “Parking Charge Notices” which further suggests that the signage is completely inadequate.

I am inclined to appeal as I did read on another well-known parking-related forum that one of the few times the IAS have found in favour of the driver is in cases of inadequate signage.

If anyone has any thoughts or queries I would welcome them. I'm happy to provide more details if requested.

Thanks.

Coupon-mad

I would appeal - using a version like the IPC appeal shown in the NEWBIES thread - but would not recommend the IAS at all. I would rather take my chances after first appeal and ignore them unless you get a court claim.

I agree that signage is woeful, trouble is, I don't think the IAS will agree. They are considered by many to be operating a practice akin to a kangaroo court. You'll find they make bizarre decisions that put people on the back foot for being sued.

pappa_golf

the signage must have been personally inspected by the IPC , note the 0844 number !

peter_the_piper

If it was not meant to be entrapment then they would have continued the DYLines, I know they are not legal but most people would obey them.

behindtheeye

Thanks folks.

Re: the appeal, I can see the one in the Newbies thread with the 5 numbered points - is that what you are suggesting? Should I make no references to this specific incident (inadequate signage) in it?

What is the comment about putting "people on the back foot for being sued" - who suing who?!

Coupon-mad

They might sue you and these can be defended if so no CCJ risk as long as you do not ignore a court claim. But people who lose at IAS always post despondently, having handed the other side something they will then twist against you. Not good, do not bother with IAS.

Yes send that appeal 'as is' but don't come back all surprised when they reject (you are expecting that now).

behindtheeye

Bit of a strange twist (at least it seems that way to me)...

I submitted the appeal as recommended and they replied very quickly reporting that the details I gave do not match the details they have supposedly acquired from the DVLA about me. They suggest that unless I am the driver they cannot deal with the request.

I have called the DVLA and they definitely have the same name and address I put on the appeal.

Any idea what to do next? Is this some shady ploy to make me reveal more details?

pappa_golf

they have written the vrn down wrong and got the wrong vehicles info , is the vrn correct on the ticket , can you log onto the website and ATTEMPT to pay?

behindtheeye

Good idea.

Just tried and and it seems to go through, I input my reference and it displays the correct VRN and amount.

Puzzled.

Coupon-mad

behindtheeye wrote: »

Bit of a strange twist (at least it seems that way to me)...

I submitted the appeal as recommended and they replied very quickly reporting that the details I gave do not match the details they have supposedly acquired from the DVLA about me. They suggest that unless I am the driver they cannot deal with the request.

I have called the DVLA and they definitely have the same name and address I put on the appeal.

Any idea what to do next? Is this some shady ploy to make me reveal more details?

This is DE, a notorious bunch on forums and if you smell a rat maybe there is one. It may be too soon for them to have got DVLA data in which case...ermmm...someone must be telling porkies.

He's an ex-Policeman, the guy who runs this lot (that's always been in the public domain, in newspaper articles featuring him and all).

So, how long ago was the windscreen PCN?

Dyl Kurpil and cronies cannot lawfully have got your DVLA data before day 29 after the parking event. So, are we past that date?

behindtheeye

It was issued on 23/11. So I think today is day 29.