IAS appeal - byelaws

Dublindel

Now I know the advice about using them and I agree, but I wanted to publish up the response which is due any day now.

It concerns byelaws and a ppc trying to convert a penalty charge into a civil parking charge so they can collect the cash. As a byelaw charge they can prosecute but the charge goes to the state. I cannot see a way for IAS to find in favour of the ppc as they have admitted in their submissions that it's a Penalty charge. I will hopefully have bews next week.

Incidentally, I recorded my letter to the IAS which is the same office as the IPC and low and behold, when I checked if it had arrived and been signed for, it was signed for by Gladstones. Is that what they call jointer?

beamerguy

Dublindel wrote: »

Incidentally, I recorded my letter to the IAS which is the same office as the IPC and low and behold, when I checked if it had arrived and been signed for, it was signed for by Gladstones. Is that what they call jointer?

Gladstones / IPC / IAS are the same set up.
It beggars belief why government and the DCLG allows this scam.

Gladstones signed for the letter, they passed it to the next desk who are the dodgy IPC and in turn it went to the next desk being the even more dodgy IAS.

twhitehousescat

Incidentally, I recorded my letter to the IAS which is the same office as the IPC and low and behold, when I checked if it had arrived and been signed for, it was signed for by Gladstones. Is that what they call jointer?

never !


As a byelaw charge they can prosecute but the charge goes to the state.



can they ? or is it the landower that has to issue papers via a magistrates court within 6 mths


in thee case of bylaws , lets see an IPC member (with gladstones backing) bring one to court!

this would finally kill the golden goose thru publicity

The_Deep

If PoPLA are going to allow all bye-laws appeals, it will look a bit odd, if the IAS reject them.

twhitehousescat

The_Deep wrote: »

If PoPLA are going to allow all bye-laws appeals, it will look a bit odd, if the IAS reject them.

two seperate entities


only one attempt of bylaws at JLA , and they pulled out before case


"if" gladstones tried this it would be suicide.


the IPC and BPA members are happy with the resuklts of "conology" and would not attempt to have the golden goose strangled

Dublindel

I'm hoping for a suicide then. I want to send this off to various organisations and media for a reaction should it go the way I expect. They will kill their own golden goose

twhitehousescat

await the IAS rebuff , and sit tight and await court papers , which PPC is it and what type of bylaws ?

Dublindel

UK Parking Patrol Office. I'm assisting with it and it's at Newcastle Airport. I think that they report to Park and Fly and not the landowners.

Coupon-mad

Yes and the pics are taken by ordinary CCtv by Park & Fly employees and often show a different time than that shown on the 'penalty' bribe. The signs are also woeful, stuck at right angles to the road on wire fences and the contract is only with Park & Fly and offers a bounty per PCN I seem to recall (not a real penalty under byelaws then, just a backhander situation).

Umkomaas

If there's any prospect of the IAS having to adjudicate in favour of the motorist, against the PPC, the likelihood is they will get the PPC to drop the charge to avoid setting any precedent.

We await further news.

twhitehousescat

no the IAS will rule for the PPC , they do not actually look at appeal , just say No , then the PPC and gladstones will send you pretty red letters , saying you are a naughty boy , pay up or we will kidnap your cat ,