Quick Question regarding PoFA compliance

pvt

UPDATE:

Followed the suggested process and sent off the appeal letter recommended in the sticky. I added a request for the name of the debtor and the "period" of parking as required by PoFA, as neither were in their NtK.

Their response is to state that they are "Not Obliged" to give the name of the land owner, and they have simply ignored my request for the period of time etc. Interestingly, although I stated clearly that I was not the driver, their rejection letter clearly says "You parked..."

I cannot get near enough or high enough to take a picture of their signage that is readable (which speaks volumes about its suitability), and they haven't provided a copy of it as requested either.

The sticky recommends not appealing to the IAS kangaroo court. Is that still the advice?

beamerguy

pvt wrote: »

UPDATE:

Followed the suggested process and sent off the appeal letter recommended in the sticky. I added a request for the name of the debtor and the "period" of parking as required by PoFA, as neither were in their NtK.

Their response is to state that they are "Not Obliged" to give the name of the land owner, and they have simply ignored my request for the period of time etc. Interestingly, although I stated clearly that I was not the driver, their rejection letter clearly says "You parked..."

I cannot get near enough or high enough to take a picture of their signage that is readable (which speaks volumes about its suitability), and they haven't provided a copy of it as requested either.

The sticky recommends not appealing to the IAS kangaroo court. Is that still the advice?

The PCM muppets will not discuss with you, any PPC that belongs to the Gladstones IAS sham are just scammers and low life

Do your homework to find out who the landowner is, they are not invisible. Maybe PCM HAVE SOMETHING TO HIDE
Most here will say do not appeal to the kangaroo IAS but you have a case to do so and part of your appeal will be the refusal of PCM to provide information requested
The children that run the IAS will probably ignore it and also reject it. The point of this is to show a judge (if it gets that far) that you have tried and been ignored by an ATA

Thereafter, just wait, ignore all silly debt collectors and see if PCM try to take it further.

Do remember that judges are wise to the scam and would not take kindly to a company who refuses to provide information

It's no difference to a bank chasing you for money but refuse to give you further information

pvt

Thanks Beamerguy,

I am fully aware that the appeal would be rejected. What I am curious about is whether there is considered to be any downside to making that appeal?

beamerguy

pvt wrote: »

Thanks Beamerguy,

I am fully aware that the appeal would be rejected. What I am curious about is whether there is considered to be any downside to making that appeal?

There is no downside except you will waste your time with the kangaroos

In your case though, it would be handy to show a judge that your efforts to mitigate were ignored

Umkomaas

What I am curious about is whether there is considered to be any downside to making that appeal?

I would say there is a downside. If (as likely) you lose at the IAS, the PPC might be encouraged to pursue you in the small claims court. Gladstones, with their incestuous links to the IPC and IAS, may well encourage the PPC to sue.

They might say to a Judge that your initial appeal to the PPC was rejected, as was your second stage appeal to the 'independent' IAS - also turned down. They will remind the Judge that the IAS is 'independent', it is approved by government via their DVLA agency, and it is, separately, approved by the Chartered Institute of Trading Standards as an official provider of ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution).

Could sound pretty impressive, so you'd need to be rebutting all of this before you even start on presenting your defence. You need to weigh up the pros and cons.

pvt

And 20 months later, MCOL claim has just turned up.

Intend to defend it.

Curious to hear what the current view is on responding with a counterclaim - I did warn in my first letter to the PPC that I would do so, but curious to know whether that forces them show up rather than cry off at the 11th hour, and is therefore still considered a good tactic?

Do I have to decide whether I am making a counterclaim before I acknowledge service? Or can I leave that 28 days like the defence?

Also I did a SAR to the PPC about a week ago in anticipation, but I doubt I'll get their response before I need to file the defence.

All help & advice welcome.

KeithP

What is the Issue Date on your Claim Form?

Coupon-mad

Only do a counter claim if you have grounds to do so. In most cases the answer is no.

beamerguy

pvt wrote: »

And 20 months later, MCOL claim has just turned up.

Intend to defend it.

Curious to hear what the current view is on responding with a counterclaim - I did warn in my first letter to the PPC that I would do so, but curious to know whether that forces them show up rather than cry off at the 11th hour, and is therefore still considered a good tactic?

Do I have to decide whether I am making a counterclaim before I acknowledge service? Or can I leave that 28 days like the defence?

Also I did a SAR to the PPC about a week ago in anticipation, but I doubt I'll get their response before I need to file the defence.

All help & advice welcome.

I don't think anyone here says respond with a counterclaim, you will not be on Judge Rinder

Your defence is the key to your win and then you can claim costs against them

They have 30 days to respond to a SAR

pvt

KeithP wrote: »

What is the Issue Date on your Claim Form?

20 February