IPC and BPA confusion - shows both - online appeal error HELP!

Torosaurus1

First time poster, i have read the sticky and started my appeal letter but still have some questions.
I have received a letter from G24 for overstaying at Crawley County Oak.

The letter shows Accredited Independent Parking Committee Operator logo on back bottom right corner. Yet when i search on the BPA it shows them, and it shows them on the IPC too. I have no idea which appeal template to use and if i will be able to appeal to POPLA? Also the IPC stands for Community not Committee?

Secondly, i used a template from this site for 'no nonsense tough approach' however would like someone to check it over before i send it? ** at the bottom of this ** Is it too detailed, should i just respond with the template asking for extra details before making a decision and then send the other one in response? Also, does this count as starting the appeal?

"I am the keeper of the vehicle and am aware of your purported 'parking charge'. The driver will not be identified. I require the following information so that I can make an informed decision:

1. Who is the party that contracted with your company and are they the landowner?
2. Is your charge based on damages for breach of contract? Answer yes or no.
3. Please provide photos of the signs that you say were on site, which you contend formed a contract with the driver.
4. Please provide all photographs taken of this vehicle.
5. Please provide proof that the timing of any camera or timer used was synchronised with all other cameras and/or systems & machines......"

Additionally, when i go to the G24 appeal link (as on their letter) i enter all my details and page redirects to an error page, there is no email address provided so it is impossible to appeal! I'm assuming my only other option is to send by post? Which is a pain as this will cost time and money (I am 7 months pregnant and very ill, plus i don't have a printer any more) when actually it is their error that their website is working incorrectly? I bet their payment area never breaks down...

I didn't notice any signs when parking, I've not been there before and I do not live anywhere near to go back and have a second look. It is a big shopping complex, where online the individual stores say free parking on their websites, so it didn't occur to me to look. I do not have receipts for my shopping as items were gifts so gave them the receipt, but luckily paid by card in one store so does show a bank statement payment.

**The letter I was going to upload to their appeal page **

"G24 Ltd
PO Box 3320
Gerrards Cross
Bucks SL9 8WT

Dear Sir or Madam,

Ticket number:
Vehicle registration number:

You issued me with a parking ticket on 02/08/2017 but I believe it was unfairly issued. I decline your invitation to name the driver, which is not required of me as the keeper of the vehicle. I will not be paying your demand for payment for the following reasons:

· Mitigating circumstances
There are mitigating circumstances to explain why the vehicle was parked where it was and the charge be waived for these reasons.

1. The driver was taken ill when visiting the complex which meant they had to unexpectedly visit two further stores for the use of their facilities, causing further delay in leaving the complex. The driver is heavily pregnant and suffering from hyperemesis and anaemia in pregnancy. Please see attached evidence from the driver’s doctor as proof of claim. Hyperemesis in pregnancy is extreme sickness, causing severe nausea and vomiting. Anaemia in pregnancy is a deficiency in iron and makes the person very tired and dizzy. Necessary medication must be taken with food, therefore when feeling unwell the driver had to visit another store to purchase something to eat after their planned shop in order to take their medication. The medication can also make them feel very sick which resulted in needing to visit another store to use their toilet facilities to save embarrassment. The driver was unable to return to the vehicle in this time.

2. The driver was a genuine customer, in attendance with their two year old daughter who requires the use of a child car seat and pushchair. When the driver arrived, they had to take their time to find an appropriate parking space that would allow enough room to safely unload their toddler and retrieve and set up the pushchair from the vehicles boot. This needed to be a space close to the shops the driver was planning to visit due to their current medical conditions. There was not sufficient parent and child parking bays to allow this, therefore the driver had to spend time finding an appropriate alternative space. Due to the confined space it also took longer to do this than is usual.

3. On return to the vehicle, another had parked closely, therefore there was not enough room to get the toddler and pushchair back into the vehicle quickly. Again this caused further delay to the driver, through no fault of their own and due to lack of parent and child parking bays.

• There was insufficient signage

The car park in question has no clear signage to explain what the relevant parking restrictions are. This means no contract can be formed with the landowner and all tickets are issued illegally. There is heavy signage promoting the various shops and eateries, but no clear signage to indicate any parking contract at the entrances of the many stores at the complex. The signs are small, inconspicuous and not at eye level, meaning they are not obvious or easy to read. Furthermore, whilst trying to find an appropriate parking space the driver’s main attention was on the road conditions and any potential hazards.

· The charge is disproportionate and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss
The amount you have charged is not based upon any genuine pre-estimate of loss to your company or the landowner. The times shown on the parking charge notice are out of peak times and many parking spaces would be available for use for other customers, causing no loss to your company or land owner.

In this case, the £70 charge you are asking for far exceeds the cost to the landowner given that parking on the site is free of charge to customers. I therefore feel the amount you are asking for is excessive.

It is surprising given the vast variety of shops and eateries available on the complex, that parking is restricted to 180 minutes. The driver was a genuine visitor to the complex and had travelled a long way from home to visit the area and spend time and money in the many stores available, it is unfair that a customer should be penalised in this way, especially in the mitigating circumstances.

If you choose to pursue me please be aware that I will not enter into any correspondence and this will be the only letter you will receive from me until you answer the specific points raised in my letter.

Yours faithfully,"

Is this good enough? Which version am I best to use?

Thank you in advance and sorry if I've broken any posting rules, but have been searching through the forums for hours. I'm new to all this, the worst I've had was a ticket for parking on a yellow line once where my front wheels were touching the line.

Redx

G24 appear in the IPC AOS section ONLY !!

so although they may be corporate members of both trade bodies, they use and pay for the IPC AOS and so you treat it and them using the IPC advice

use the black text IPC template in the NEWBIES sticky thread, nothing else

G24 will reject this, so then you are in IGNORE mode

the IPC keep the same initials but keep changing the words they represent , it may be fishy but is a red herring , ignore it

in parallel, complain to the landholder and insist on a cancellation, this action is your BEST COURSE OF ACTION

g24 have 6 years to try a court claim, known as an MCOL (google it)

there is absolutely NO CHANCE of appealing to POPLA, as they are not in the BPA AOS scheme

Torosaurus1

Thank you for clarifying. So dismiss the mitigating circ letter totally?

Gosh 6 years of nail biting - I don't know if I can handle that lol!

I haven't been able to tell who the land owner is, had a bit of a google but nothing conclusive.

I have emailed the store that i visited and asked if there is a way of them cancelling too.

Redx

chances are that if its a retail park its an MA that manages it on behlaf of the landholder

the Land Registry can tell you who the actual landholder is , for a small fee

but knowing who the retail park is usually throws up the MA that rents the units out, plus the stores should know who they are renting from

The MA is likely to have engaged G24

any story , without revealing the drivers details to anyone , so from "an occupant of the car, or keeper" should go to the MA (or landholder)

the 6 year maximum rule has been in place now for 44 years in england and wales (5 years maximum in scotland) , for the small claims court (think Judge Rinder)

Redx

a quick google search finds a pdf with this info embedded

COUNTY OAK
RETAIL PARK
FURTHER INFORMATION
Please contact either of the joint agents,
Morgan Williams or Harvey Spack Field.

on behalf of STANDARD LIFE INVESTMENTS

Torosaurus1

Redx,

I have received this email rejection from them, but nothing in writing via post.

......................................

Thank you for your email.

You received a parking charge because the driver breached the terms and conditions of parking - and is therefore liable to pay the amount of a parking charge stated on our signage. We also refer you to Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act, which sets out the legal basis upon which we may demand payment from the vehicle’s registered keeper if the driver fails to pay us the parking charge.

The nature of our contract with our client is confidential but will be supplied during any Court proceedings.

The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ("the Act), (Schedule 4), which governs parking on private land, provides a definition for "parking charge" and "adequate notice" of such private parking charges. The relevant sections of Schedule 4 to the Act state :

“parking charge”

(a) in the case of a relevant obligation arising under the terms of a relevant contract, means a sum in the nature of a fee or charge, and

(b) in the case of a relevant obligation arising as a result of a trespass or other tort, means a sum in the nature of damages ...

... “relevant obligation” means
(a) an obligation arising under the terms of a relevant contract; or
(b) an obligation arising, in any circumstances where there is no relevant contract, as a result of a trespass or other tort committed by parking the vehicle on the relevant land; ...

... The reference in the definition of “parking charge” to a sum in the nature of damages is to a sum of which adequate notice was given to drivers of vehicles

(when the vehicle was parked on the relevant land).
For the purposes of sub-paragraph (2) “adequate notice” means notice given by:
... (b) ... the display of one or more notices which
(i) specify the sum as the charge for unauthorised parking; and
(ii) are adequate to bring the charge to the notice of drivers who park vehicles on the relevant land".

In this instance a parking charge has been issued based on the fact that the driver of your vehicle entered into a contract with us (by the act of parking the vehicle) and our signage (which states the terms and conditions of parking) having been clearly displayed in the car park.

The Act permits parking charges to be rendered on private land, and the case of Parking Eye Limited v Somerfield Stores Limited [2012] EWCA Civ 1338 (Court of Appeal) held that (taking into account inflation) the parking company was entitled to claim a parking charge of a similar amount to that which we have charged, and therefore your reference to the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 is not of any relevance in the context of this parking charge.

You should also be aware that the amount of our parking charges accords within recommendations by our Trade Associations.

The photographs provide evidence of the parking event that occurred which show that the driver breached the terms and conditions of parking which were clearly displayed on the signage in the car park. If you wish to receive further documentation, these will be supplied once you make a proper request under the Data Protection Act. The fact that such documentation might be used in any Court proceedings is not a legitimate way to circumvent the Data Protection Act.

The terms and conditions of the car park are displayed in prominent locations throughout the car park. Any vehicle found in contravention of these terms and conditions is subject to a Contractual Parking Charge Notice. Vehicles entering and exiting the car park are monitored and details of their registration number and time of entry/exit are recorded. Your vehicle was logged entering the car park on the 24 Jul 2017 at 14:52 and exiting 24 Jul 2017 at 18:30. Photographic evidence of the breach of contractual term is provided on your Contractual Parking Charge Notice.

There are sufficient signs at the entrance to and in prominent locations throughout the car park displaying the terms and conditions. Your are welcome to revisit the site to view the signage, we advise you to adhere to the terms and conditions of parking when visit the site.
Our signage complies with the Independent Parking Committee's Approved Operator Scheme.

As we have extensively investigated this Contractual Parking Charge Notice and provided you with the results of our investigation, no further investigation will be undertaken. Any further correspondence may not receive a response, the options below are still open to you.

You now have one of the following options available to you:

1. Pay the outstanding Parking Charge. Payment of your Contractual Parking Charge Notice can be made via the payment line: 0333 733 3000 or by sending a cheque or postal order to G24 Limited, PO Box 3320, Gerrards Cross, Buckinghamshire, SL9 8WT.

2. If you believe this decision is incorrect, you are entitled to appeal to The Independent Appeals Service (*link*), The Independent Appeals Service provides an Alternative Dispute Resolution scheme for disputes of this type. As you have complied with our internal appeals procedure you may use, and we will engage with, the The Independent Appeals Service Standard Appeals Service providing you lodge an appeal to them within 21 days of your first rejection.

3. If you choose to do nothing, we will seek to recover the monies owed to us via our debt recovery procedures and may proceed with Court action against you.

Customer Services
G24 Ltd

To Pay your Parking Charge visit *link* or call our payment line on 0845 452 7777.

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, if you wish to continue your appeal visit our appeals website at *link*

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

Registered in England. Company Registration number: 5457196. Registered Company address: Batchworth House, Batchworth Place, Church Street, Rickmansworth, Herts, WD3 1JE.

This email (and any attachments) is intended solely for the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. It may contain confidential and/or legally privileged information. Any statement or opinions therein are not necessarily those of G24 Ltd unless specifically stated. Any unauthorised use, disclosure or copying is prohibited. If you have received this email in error,please notify the sender and delete it from your system. Security and reliability of the e-mail and attachments are not guaranteed. You must take full responsibility for virus checking.

Guys_Dad

Please remove your name from the previous post. PPCs monitor this forum and they would love to home in on who we are giving advice to.

Redx

remove the name and pcn number from the above rejection from G24

what they failed to tell you is that you also have the option to IGNORE G24 AND THEIR DEBT COLLECTORS FOR THE NEXT 6 YEARS ( which is their option 3) )

the NEWBIES sticky thread tells you about the IPC members , the IAS kangaroo court and ignoring debt letters

I did tell you this would happen in my earlier reply , and what to do

Coupon-mad

You are at the stage where everyone ignores IPC firms; that's made clear in the NEWBIES thread already. And Redx told you this:

G24 will reject this, so then you are in IGNORE mode

...so we don't need to see that template letter of drivel, or any other updates except when you tell us you've got the retailer Store Manger(s) or County Oak's Management, to cancel it.

Like everyone does v G24 on here.

Umkomaas

Gosh 6 years of nail biting - I don't know if I can handle that lol!

Well you need to urgently contact the MA and C-O-M-P-L-A-I-N.

Have you yet done so - Redx provided you with the leads? That's the only way to get rid of this now (short of paying, which no one here will recommend!).

a quick google search finds a pdf with this info embedded

COUNTY OAK
RETAIL PARK
FURTHER INFORMATION
Please contact either of the joint agents,
Morgan Williams or Harvey Spack Field.

on behalf of STANDARD LIFE INVESTMENTS

Torosaurus1

I had found the same information as Redx, however to me it looked as though they'd sold the land not that they were the land owners. I have emailed both the companies, however await a response.

I have even emailed the stores that were visited at the retail park, but have had no reply at all.

I appreciate all the help and I am not asking anyone to do it all for me, but I have researched and looked into this before posting.

This is the first time I have been in a situation like this and I am trying to explore every avenue. However it is very challenging when these companies can do as they wish and the land owners and stores are unwilling to help. I imagine they receive thousands of complaints and mine will not be of a priority.