IAS Appeal - No response

drh90

Unfortunately I find myself in the position where I have been given a PCN by Link Parking. To cut a long story short, I have a lease for my apartment, which allows me to park in an allocated bay outside of my apartment. However on the 4th of December Link Parking were brought onto site by the Management Company to stop non-residents from parking in the area. They posted permits to us, however these were accompanied by a letter describing them as 'visitors permits' rather than residents permits. For that reason (as I am not a visitor) I was not displaying a permit when Link took over the site, and subsequently got given a PCN.

I appealed this immediately, attaching a copy of my lease document, the erroneous unclear letter (explaining why I was not displaying a permit) and the reason for my appeal. This was of course rejected by Link Parking, because 'the signage on site is clear'. :mad:

So then I sent the appeal to the IAS, along with fully comprehensive evidence that I am legally justified in parking in my space, quoting the relevant case law, various letters I had from the Management Company outlining the rationale behind introducing Link to the site and so on.

The strange thing is that Link Parking have not uploaded any evidence yet, and it's now been 14 working days since I first lodged the appeal with the IAS. I understand that it's been Christmas and New Year, which affects what might be interpreted as 'working days', however considering I lodged it at least 1 full week before Christmas, the operator has clearly now exceeded the 5-Day window given to them to prove that I am liable for the PCN. I have contacted the IAS and asserted as such, but have not received a response.

The IAS Private Parking Charge Appeals Rules And Procedures clearly state that:

5.1.4 Within 5 working days of the Initial Appeal being registered the Trader must upload sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case. A ‘prima facie case’ means sufficient evidence for the Adjudicator to conclude that it is more likely than not that the Appellant is liable for the charge.

5.1.5 If, after 5 working days, the Trader has not responded to the Initial Appeal then the Trader agrees to forfeit the appeal by default and cancel the parking charge and any associated fees.

However it also later states:

5.1.10 Time limits under this part may be extended by the IAS with or without notice either upon application by a party or of its own motion.

As I have seen on some threads here that the IAS is seen by many as a 'kangeroo court' I am slightly concerned now that they are going to try and fob me off by extending the deadline for Link Parking. Is there anything I can do to prevent that, or is it just a case of having to swallow it because of term 5.1.10?

Also just wondering whether a lack of response from Parking Companies within the prescribed timescales is something that's common place or not?

Redx

the IPC aand IAS work as a trade body on behlaf of their client, and as GLADRAGS solicitors too

so you can bet any protest of yours would fall on deaf ears and whatever happens you will have to swallow it , unfair or not

the only decent chance you will get about these tickets etc is in front of a judge in your local civil court

in the meantime, sit on your hands and wait (hard though it is)

Coupon-mad

I am slightly concerned now that they are going to try and fob me off by extending the deadline for Link Parking.

They will, of course, that's why they have that sneaky clause letting them move the goalposts.

Also just wondering whether a lack of response from Parking Companies within the prescribed timescales is something that's common place or not?

Can't tell you, because the clear advice here is NOT to try IAS.

Never mind, you might be a Christmas miracle case and win, so wait and see now but don't hold your breath, LOL. If not, so what, defend it when Gladstones pick up the reins from the IPC/IAS - all run by the same Directors at various times - you will have hopefully learnt that already from reading all the Parking Prankster's blogs you can find about the IAS kangaroo court.

Umkomaas

Often, if you’ve done enough to prove your case, rather than uphold it (thereby rejecting the case of their beloved member), the IAS will slip a crafty phone call to the PPC recommending they withdraw their charge. We’ve seen that a number of times, although, in contrast, we’ve seen them dismiss very strong appeals, in favour of the operator, enough to say that the odds, even with a cast iron case, are stacked against you.

Prepare for the worst, then anything afterwards might be a bonus! Ultimately the IAS decision is not binding on you.

drh90

Further to my previous post, it now appears as though the wrong information has been uploaded by Link to the IAS website. Unfortunately I can't post a photo to show you (account too new) however it's now saying on the IAS appeals interface.

"Issued on 07/01/2018 by Link Parking Ltd"
"Originally rejected by operator on 17/12/2017"

Previously there was no date given, it was just saying "Issued by Link Parking Ltd" with no mention of a date. I have screenshots (proof) showing both before and after.

Where does this leave me legally now? My PCN itself says 07/12/17 which was the actual correct date of issue.

Quentin

No legal mileage there. It's an admin error.

Put the whole thing to the back of your mind as #2 and wait and see

Fruitcake

[STRIKE]Legally[/STRIKE] Lawfully (this is not a criminal case) you are left following the advice already given.
The decision of the operator and IAS is not binding on the motorist, so you can lawfully ignore them.

Other than just wait for up to six years to see if the scammers try court, you should be complaining to the MA and the landowner about this.

You should also complain to your MP and ask them to confirm that they will be supporting the forthcoming private members bill about the unregulated parking industry.

Please also add your complaints to the WHICH magazine using the link in post 1 of this thread.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5765579

Specifically mention that you are being harasses by an unregulated parking company who are operating a for profit business on your demised space and penalising you in the process. They are also operating sharp practice by telling you that you need a permit, even though your lease tells you otherwise, and you believe they have deliberately given residents the wrong permit.

This is what judges have said about residential parking.

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/residential-parking.html

drh90

Just a final update then - it turns out that I may have been that miracle case!

Appeal Status: Operator Conceded
The Operator has conceded this appeal due to Landowner Intervention.

:j

Link Parking had not yet uploaded any Prima Facie case when I checked at 5pm this evening. The 21-day period that the IAS 'allow' was up at 23:59 tonight, so it would have been interesting, had the landowner not intervened, to see what the IAS did once that time was up and one of their darling IPC members hadn't yet uploaded any evidence! Some watery fob-off about deadline extensions and clauses no doubt.

A very informative forum indeed. Thanks for all the various pieces of advice around the forum and in this post - it most certainly helped with the letter of complaint I sent to the Landowner/Management Company - which it looks like ultimately resolved the issue.

Umkomaas

Appeal Status: Operator Conceded
The Operator has conceded this appeal due to Landowner Intervention.

As suggested in my post #4. I guess if the full truth be known the PPC would have wanted to press this despite landowner intervention, but it was the IAS that persuaded them to concede otherwise they would be forced to uphold your appeal. We really never see the IAS give a thumbs down to one of its paymasters.

Well done. You’ve got this nasty off the bottom of your shoe.

pappa_golf

drh90 wrote: »

Just a final update then - it turns out that I may have been that miracle case!

Appeal Status: Operator Conceded
The Operator has conceded this appeal due to Landowner Intervention.

:j

Link Parking had not yet uploaded any Prima Facie case when I checked at 5pm this evening. The 21-day period that the IAS 'allow' was up at 23:59 tonight, so it would have been interesting, had the landowner not intervened, to see what the IAS did once that time was up and one of their darling IPC members hadn't yet uploaded any evidence! Some watery fob-off about deadline extensions and clauses no doubt.

A very informative forum indeed. Thanks for all the various pieces of advice around the forum and in this post - it most certainly helped with the letter of complaint I sent to the Landowner/Management Company - which it looks like ultimately resolved the issue.

looks like link have had another "bloody nose" submitted by thre incompitance of the IPC/gladys , perhaps they are on a falling out spree and not talking to each other now http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=73690890&postcount=12

Coupon-mad

Brilliant start to the New Year for the 'non-victims' of PPC scamworld!