Appeal dismissed by IAS

beamerguy

Snakes_Belly wrote: »

Thanks for your replies. I had to go through Citizens Advice to get to Trading Standards. I was getting fed up with the letters especially after telling Excel that I would not engage with debt collectors.


If they do take me to court I shall play every card that I possibly can and I have a good collection of letters now that are bordering on harassment. Zenith halved the amount I owed if I paid by a certain date. That smacked of desperation in the light of the PMB. When the date expired I received another letter offering me the same deal of £69.99. I think that they are trying to salvage what they can before the PMB is introduced.

I rather feel you are stressing out over nothing

Unlike debt collectors contacting you if you owed
money to a bank etc, you would need to respond BUT
those debt collectors who operate in the great parking
scam have NO CLOUT WHATSOEVER.
Sooner or later when they realise you are not a mug,
they give up and just tell the PPC they are failures.

Your appeal failed at the IPC/IAS because that is a scam.

Right now, you owe nothing unless a judge says you do.
All you ever got was an invoice from a parking cowboy

Snakes_Belly

Update on my case. I have now received a letter before claim from Excel Parking. Their correspondence appears to conform to the protocols. I will reply using some of the examples on the Newbies thread but some points are not relevant.


There are a couple of things that I am unsure about. With regard to the issue of trespass I could possibly have been in the car park for around 10 minutes trying to obtain a ticket as I did speak to some people working in the railway arches to ask them if there was another machine. It is debatable as to whether I was there for 10 mins+ I arrived in the car park at around 10.22am. My train ticket was purchased at 10.39 and the Station is just across the road from the car park and I bought the ticket immediately. Would this mean I was trespassing? I assume I should be asking if their claim is for trespass or breach of contract. Should I ask for the audit trail to the ticket machine/machines or is it up to them to prove that their machine was not working?


I think that these companies are trying to push these cases forward now before the PMB comes into force so by asking for more information it delays the process.


If Excel finally take me to court there are a couple of case transcripts that I need. Link Parking V Mr N. and Camden Council V Mr Prendi. I have a copy of Prendi but I don't know if its a full transcript. It an interesting case and relevant to my circumstances. I have pasted the details below.


'Register Kept Under Regulation 20 of the Road Traffic (Parking Adjudicators)(London) Regulations 1993, as amended or Paragraph 21 of the Schedule to the Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations 2007, as applicable

Case Reference: 2100346960
Appellant: Mr Antonio Prendi
Authority: Camden
VRM: GK06ZGT
PCN: CU25516184
Contravention Date: 19 Apr 2010
Contravention Time: 13:45
Contravention Location: Adelaide Road
Penalty Amount: £80.00
Contravention: At a meter, p & d, voucher bay without paying
Decision Date: 30 Sep 2010
Adjudicator: Henry Michael Greenslade
Appeal Decision: Allowed
Direction: cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and the Notice to Owner.
Reasons:
A contravention occurs if a vehicle is parked in an on-street pay and display bay during controlled hours, without clearly displaying a valid pay and display voucher.

There is no dispute that Mr Prendi's vehicle was at this location in Linden Gardens or that the Penalty Charge Notice was issued to it, as shown in the photographs/digital images produced by the Enforcement Authority.

Mr Prendi says that he went to the pay and display machine but it was not working out of order and so he went to look for another machine but there was no other one near. Mr Prendi adds that the next one is over a mile away.

Mr Prendi says that he left a note to this effect in the vehicle. The civil enforcement officer has not recorded details of any note but the images appear to confirm one may have been there.

The Enforcement Authority do not appear to dispute that the pay and display was not working and have produced no maintenance records in this regard. The Enforcement Authority do refer to the signage on the machine, advising the motorist that if 'not working use another machine'.

Whether there is another machine within a reasonable distance will depend on the circumstances and each case will turn on its own facts. However, the Enforcement Authority cannot expect motorists to tramp the streets of their borough trying to find a machine in working order. Going too far away from the parking place may indeed involving entering a different parking zone where, restrictions and charges could differ.

Considering carefully all the evidence before me, I cannot find as a fact that, on this particular occasion, a contravention did occur.

Accordingly, this appeal must be allowed'


Thank you.

beamerguy

Snakes Belly ...

please change "I" to the "keeper", the vermin read the forum

Snakes_Belly

Thanks Beamer but I have already admitted that I was driving. Unfortunately like many people I found this site after I had started the process. Naturally I would now do things a bit differently.

beamerguy

Snakes_Belly wrote: »

Thanks Beamer but I have already admitted that I was driving. Unfortunately like many people I found this site after I had started the process. Naturally I would now do things a bit differently.

OK missed that.

So, apart from stringing this out, don't forget that
The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)
starts 25th May ... SAR is FREE
https://www.macroberts.com/subject-access-requests-gdpr/?utm_source=Mondaq&utm_medium=syndication&utm_campaign=View-Original

A great new incentive to get the info you want

It is the up to date version of "hide and "seek"

Snakes_Belly

Thank you Beamer. If and when Excel take me to court they will be taking a risk especially in the current wake of the PMB. There is no guarantee that they will win.


I have 30 days to reply to the LBC and I shall make sure that they get my reply by registered post a couple of days before.

Quentin

Don't use any form of signed for service when sending letters to ppcs.


Use standard first class mail, and get a certificate of posting (foc) from the post office when handing the letter in

Quentin

You mention "trespass" in your #43


What makes you think you will be getting a trespass summons??


Read up on this in the newbies faq thread (trespass only comes into it when the car was parked on railway property, and they only have 6 months to summons the owner for this offence)


Doesn't apply to you

KeithP

Snakes_Belly wrote: »

...I shall make sure that they get my reply by registered post a couple of days before.

Do not send anything to the Claimant or their solicitor by "registered post", whatever that is, - ever.

By sending anything by any signed for service you are giving the intended recipient the opportunity to refuse to accept the delivery. What do you then have? - proof of non-delivery.

Sent it by standard first class post and obtain a free Certificate of Posting from the Post Office counter. Anything posted first class is deemed delivered two working days later unless the intended recipient can prove otherwise. They cannot do that.

beamerguy

As QUENTIN says ..... no signed for delivery as they
might refuse it ... THEY are scammers you know

First class post with a receipt from the PO and it is deemed
delivered within 2 working days ... that's good for a judge

They may not win and given the rubbish we see from them
and their legals, they probably won't