PCN for a resident!

Ralph-y

do not hold your breath .......


Skippy ... sorry I mean IAS are not known for taking any thing into account ... other than there members desire to take £££ from you / the public ... :eek:


if you have some time then read / watch the below ...




https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2018-02-02/debates/CC84AF5E-AC6E-4E14-81B1-066E6A892807/Parking(CodeOfPractice)Bill

and slightly longer, the committee stage

https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/d5550515-cce9-4185-83ec-754dadb7524a

''Rip-offs from car park Cowboys must stop''; unfair treatment; signage deliberately confusing to ensure a PCN is issued; ''years of abuse by rogue parking companies''; bloodsuckers; ''the current system of regulation is hopeless, like putting Dracula in charge of the blood-bank''; extortionate fines; rogue operators; ''sense of injustice''; unfair charges and notices; wilfully misleading; signage is a deliberate act to deceive or mislead; ''confusing signs are often deliberate, to trap innocent drivers''; unreasonable; a curse; harassing; operating in a disgusting way; appeals service is no guarantee of a fair hearing; loathed; outrageous scam; dodgy practice; outrageous abuse; unscrupulous practices; ''the British Parking Association is as much use as a multi-storey car park in the Gobi desert''; and finally, by way of unanimous conclusion: ''we need to crack down on these rogue companies. They are an absolute disgrace to this country. Ordinary motorists and ordinary residents should not have to put up with this''.

These are the exact words used, so you should quote them to your MP in a complaint and ask him/her to contact Sir Greg Knight MP if he wants further information about this scam.

and some quotes from the committe stage

"The other area is hospital parking, and I want to single out one company for some pretty shady practices. That is ParkingEye"
" is very clear to me that there is collusion between parking companies and solicitors’ firms—so-called roboclaims companies. "
"They are often set up adjacently and involve the same directors and personnel. Incidentally, the same personnel get involved in the so-called appeals bodies."
"Essentially, it is a money-making enterprise that takes advantage of motorists up and down the country. They operate in a very business-like fashion, which is why I call them roboclaims companies."
"The companies are jamming up parts of our legal system."
“I now pretty much know exactly how the parking companies and in particular the IPC have been running this scam for the past 5 years. Basically both of the appeals processes are a complete and utter sham, (and part of that sham is Gladstones Solicitors itself)”
"The appeals process at Excel/VCS is run by a team of minimum wage office workers with no legal knowledge or experience whatsoever,"
" It is claimed by the head of the appeals service (retired Judge Bryn Holloway) that this is a completely independent fair process, it is not”
"The letter mentions two individuals—Will Hurley and Bryn Holloway—and concludes this is a typical example of the clear collusion between the IPC, their members and the IAS"
"what we can do about roboclaims companies and solicitors firms that profit, often in shady ways"
" the very large amounts of money that can be involved in such scams—a company called Smart Parking was involved in one such scam on my patch"
"tightening up the rules regarding the unfair use of automatic number plate recognition" "BW Legal, regularly issues 10,000 county court judgments a month, and is known to have issued 28,000 in one month"
"They are jamming up our court system, and are often totally unjustified."
" because the lifeblood of trying to extort money from people is having access to their details."



and the third reading
https://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/e5b67de6-b2f5-4e03-98bf-52d40c8af2df?in=12:05:05&out=14:14:53

it has now gone to 'the other place' .....

The Lords

All from Parking (Code of Practice) Bill Hansard







Ralph:cool:

pcn_from_cpm

I totally agree with you...but I think IAS cannot award every case to parking companies...there has to be a minimum...so why not trying if it is free?!

Umkomaas

pcn_from_cpm wrote: »

I totally agree with you...but I think IAS cannot award every case to parking companies...there has to be a minimum...so why not trying if it is free?!

We recommend only appealing to the IAS if you have an absolutely cast iron case. Such as, the PPC stating that you were the driver on the day, but you can show flight tickets, passport stamps and accommodation vouchers proving that you were actually in Hong Kong (or even more likely to win that you were sitting on The Moon!).

If motorists lose at IAS appeal stage they are more likely to be served court proceedings, most likely by Gladstones solicitors. You have to recognise the linkages in the IPC/IAS/Gladstones axis, with previously shared directors (have now tried to disentangle, but the audit trail still stains the path). Gladstones have access to insider information on (particularly) weak and vulnerable appeals, which they can select for early 'treatment'.

A decision by the IAS on behalf of a PPC will be waved in front of a Judge - 'Look Sir, the PPC turned down the appeal, then the motorist appealed to the whollly independent IAS where it was assessed by either a solicitor or barrister adjudicator who, quite independently, has also found in favour of the PPC. We urge the court to find similarly.......'

pcn_from_cpm

I agree with you on that. My case is not as strong as sitting on the moon but there is a mistake in my PCN stating a wrong location and their pictures only confirm that...

It is too late to go back anyway...