Parking Control Management UK uses unfair contracting methods to bully 17 year old driver

Adrian442

My newly fully driving licenced 17 year old son was invited to a school friend's house to stay overnight.  As the parents were away he was told to park in the allocated bay for the house as it would be empty.  He arrived in the dark and parked in the correct space.  When he visits other friends who live on private land he parks in the allocated visitor spaces.  He did not see any signs nor did he even expect to look as he had been invited and told where to park.  The school friend had no knowledge of the signs and indeed had to go hunting for them when we later asked where they were (typically observant teenager!).

He got a PCN in the post which gave a website to appeal on.  Which he did by simply stating he had permission to park and if necessary he could provide proof.  He got back a rejection using a load of contractual conditions language and it did not matter that he had permission as the resident had no right to vary the terms of the contract between him and PCM UK.

I helped him appeal via the IAS citing the Consumer Rights Act (2015) which deals with this sort of unfair contracting.  PCM continued to assert that the onus was on him to check for signs, providing nice daylight photos of them and where they are.  He provided a night time photo which showed how unclear they are in those conditions. PCM never addressed to fundamental legal issue of my son's statutory rights and the appeal adjudicator did not address the issue either despite claiming to consider appeals under UK Civil law of wich the CRA(2015) is an integral part.

He has told PCM that until they have established that a valid and fair contract was in existence then they have no right to enforce and any attempt to enforce would be resisted.  Today he got back a letter which acknowledge his letter told him how to pay and threatened debt recovery and court procedures.

I welcome any advice on the next step.  The whole basis of these charges are founded on unfair contracting practices bouncing people unawares into a contract they have no knowledge of and putting the onus on them to be aware, this cannot be right.

MothballsWallet

Did you find this forum before or after your son did the IAS appeal? We don't normally recommend that as it's a kangaroo court that only upholds 4% of appeals so that it can please its paying members, but it's a good thing to show later if PCM tries court,.

Have you read the NEWBIES thread? Please edit your post to rewrite it to include the following changes:

• Please use DRIVER and KEEPER as the PPCs do read this forum and they have been known to use forum posts against people in court.
• Please include the location of the car park - there may be other threads for it from other people and you can share information.
• Please ensure that you include the full name of the PPC - there are some cases where there are multiple companies with very similar initials and this will allow the regulars to tell you how likely the company may be to try court.

I hope you didn't use the paid for "premium" appeal service with IAS - that one's binding on the driver, whereas the free one isn't (iirc).

I'm sure one of the regulars will be along to add anything I've forgotten.

Fruitcake

He needs to get a copy of his friends family's lease/AST/home rental agreement to see what it says. This will have primacy of contract over anything an unregulated parking company says.
Complaints should be made by your son and by the family whose space was being used, to the landowner and managing agent.

He should complain to his MP, and the family should all complain individually to their MP.

Have a good look at the NEWBIES sticky Announcement, whilst waiting for the inevitable court claim, unless Plan A works (landowner cancellation), especially the second post that includes a guide to court. 

Coupon-mad

Same as this one:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6308905/pcm-ltd-failed-appeal

Links here show you the disgusting ex clamper firm you are dealing with:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/78698500#Comment_78698500

The IAS is a kangaroo court, did you realise?  You had no chance.  In court, he will.

Adrian442

The company is called Parking Control Management based in Slough. 

I saw another site which said to use the IAS which is why we did, there seemed to be no way to enter into dialogue with the company directly. 

Having seen what IAS actually do I agree it is totally biased towards the company, the adjudication was a beauty contest on who presented the prettiest evidence.  We made very clear multiple times that the legal basis for the appeal was that the contract was unfair as defined in the CRA 2015 and we uploaded the guide "unfair terms explained" as you can see the substantive legal basis for the appeal was not even mentioned:

"The Appellant should understand that the Adjudicator is not in a position to give legal advice to either of the parties but they are entitled to seek their own independent legal advice. The Adjudicator's role is to consider whether or not the parking charge has a basis in law and was properly issued in the circumstances of each individual case. In all Appeals the Adjudicator is bound by the relevant law applicable at the time and is only able to consider legal challenges and not factual mistakes nor extenuating or mitigating circumstances. Throughout this appeal the Operator has had the opportunity consider all points raised and could have conceded the appeal at any stage. The Adjudicator who deals with this Appeal is legally qualified and each case is dealt with according to their understanding of the law as it applies and the legal principles involved. A decision by an Adjudicator is not legally binding on an Appellant who is entitled to seek their own legal advice if they so wish.

In all Appeals the burden of proof is the civil one whereby the party asserting a fact or submission has to establish that matter on the balance of probabilities. If the parking operator fails to establish that a Parking Charge Notice was properly issued in accordance with the law then it is likely that an Appeal will be allowed. If the parking operator does establish that a Parking Charge Notice was properly and legally issued then the burden shifts to the Appellant to establish that the notice was improperly or unlawfully issued and if the Appellant proves those matters on the balance of probabilities then it is likely that the Appeal will be allowed. However the Appeal will be dismissed if the Appellant fails to establish those matters on the balance of probabilities. The responsibility is at all times on the parties to provide the Adjudicator with the evidential basis upon which to make a decision.

The Operator has provided evidence of the signs at the site, which make it clear any driver parking without fully displaying a valid permit in the windscreen, will be issued with the parking charge notice.

The Appellant further claims the notice is insufficient but fails to provide evidence to support the claim. I agree that if the notice was insufficient there can be no contract. The image shows the position of the vehicle and of one sign. This does not demonstrate the notice is insufficient. To do this the Appellant would need to show there were no signs closer. The Operator has established there are signs at the site. As explained above, at this stage the onus is on the Appellant to prove their claims.

The Appellant has not provided evidence of the resident permission, or on what basis the Appellant gives permission. Therefore I cannot establish if this has primacy over the contract with the Operator. The Appellant has my sympathy, but the guidance to the appeal is clear that I may only consider legal issues not extenuating circumstances. The Operator has this discretion, but they are unlikely to exercise it in the Appellant's favour, in the absence of evidence to support the claim.

The Operator has provided photographic evidence of the Appellant's vehicle parked on the land they manage, and without a valid permit displayed. The appeal is dismissed.
The Appellant claims that they had permission from the resident but fails to provides evidence to support the claims. By remaining parked on land managed by the Operator, having had notice of the terms, the Appellant agrees to them. In consideration for parking they agree to clearly display the permit or pay the charge. In this way they have entered into a contract with the Operator and agreed to be bound by the advertised terms. The only way to vary the contract is by agreement between the parties. Any advice or permission given by another, not a party to the contract, is irrelevant. If the Appellant received erroneous advice from another, they have my sympathy, but this is an issue between the Appellant and their advisor."

I did not pay for the premium service as I did not want to agree to anything binding.  The parking was in a private residential estate in Portsmouth, there are a number of them around which all have different arrangements.  The main one where my son often visits another friend has no parking enforcement scheme and has bays clearly marked for visitors, this was the first time he had visited this friend. 

The company is affiliated to the International Parking Community (IPC) is it worth contacting them?

Coupon-mad

The company is called Parking Control Management based in Slough. 

We know, that's the ex-clamper firm that my links tell you about.  On Watchdog Rogue Traders a few years back.  Threads like yours are all over the forum, I've shown you two and links to see what this bunch are like.  We beat them in court and it's rather fun...

Typical IAS 'decision' putting the burden on you to prove a negative, rather than PCM to prove there was a closer sign:

The Appellant further claims the notice is insufficient but fails to provide evidence to support the claim. I agree that if the notice was insufficient there can be no contract. The image shows the position of the vehicle and of one sign. This does not demonstrate the notice is insufficient. To do this the Appellant would need to show there were no signs closer. 

The company is affiliated to the International Parking Community (IPC) is it worth contacting them?

Nope, read about who runs it:

https://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2017/06/all-change-at-gladstones-and-ipc.html

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6272230/exposing-the-scams-of-the-ias-the-ipc-and-gladstones-all-run-by-william-hurley-john-davies/p1

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2016/01/is-independent-appeal-service-kangaroo.html

MothballsWallet

Coupon-mad said:

The company is called Parking Control Management based in Slough. 

We know, that's the ex-clamper firm that my links tell you about.  On Watchdog Rogue Traders a few years back.  Threads like yours are all over the forum, I've shown you two and links to see what this bunch are like.  We beat them in court and it's rather fun...

Typical IAS 'decision' putting the burden on you to prove a negative, rather than PCM to prove there was a closer sign:

The Appellant further claims the notice is insufficient but fails to provide evidence to support the claim. I agree that if the notice was insufficient there can be no contract. The image shows the position of the vehicle and of one sign. This does not demonstrate the notice is insufficient. To do this the Appellant would need to show there were no signs closer. 

The company is affiliated to the International Parking Community (IPC) is it worth contacting them?

Nope, read about who runs it:

https://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2017/06/all-change-at-gladstones-and-ipc.html

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6272230/exposing-the-scams-of-the-ias-the-ipc-and-gladstones-all-run-by-william-hurley-john-davies/p1

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2016/01/is-independent-appeal-service-kangaroo.html

I'm not even sure that you can prove a negative in all cases - I mean, I can prove that I did not eat any vegetables with my dinner today, but that's a specific case.

Adrian442

Thanks guys for all the links.  I do wish I had visited this forum earlier.

I have looked at the IPC code of practice which states the purpose as being to counter unsolicited parking on private land for the benefit of residents - something I entirely support.  PCM ruthlessly apply their unfair contractual conditions way outside the purpose of the code of practice they claim to follow.  So it is see you in court bitchez as far as I am concerned.  My son got another letter saying your appeal to IAS was rejected there is no further appeal cough up or it is debt collectors then court.

Response:

I am bemused why it has been sent, as the correspondence it refers to was
clear enough, but clarity and ensuring a full understanding is vital in all
circumstances.

* My son has no intention of appealing further following the
NON-BINDING IAS adjudication - the descriptions on multiple fora of IAS as a
kangaroo court are an insult to kangaroo courts.
* A valid and fair contract never existed between you and my son, as
the driver and keeper of the vehicle.
* Nothing in your responses to the appeal, nor in the adjudication,
challenges the above, despite that being the consistent substantive
legislative basis for the appeal.
* As no contract existed in accordance with his statutory rights, you
have no right to continue to try to enforce it.
* Any further attempts to enforce will be considered harassment.  We
will not put up with what you have subjected many other innocent motorists
to over the years.
* If, having taken advice, you want to establish that a valid and fair
contract did exist, then send a summons to the above address so the matter
can be heard by an appropriately qualified judge. 
* The onus is on you to establish that you have met your obligations
under CRA 2015 - they are clearly explained in the guide my son provided
during the appeal.

Fruitcake

Don't send that. In any case, it won't be a summons because this is about civil (contract) law, not criminal law.
Getting ranty won't help, and it will not make the defendant look good in court when the claimant puts that in front of a judge.

How did your son get on with obtaining a copy of the friend's lease/AST, and all the other homework you/he was set?

Coupon-mad

If you can try standard (free) IAS the new thinking this year is try it (no template but all the evidence, lease, signed WS from your friend saying the parking was permitted, etc).

Fruitcake

Did you mean standard (free) or non-standard (£15 charge and binding on the motorist)?