Regent Parking (Solution Labs) ticket for picking up passenger

Coupon-mad

Yes, we say always reply with more evidence and responding to theirs.

stefandobra

Regent Parking has now uploaded the evidence:

The operator made their Prima Facie Case on 14/01/2022 14:29:05.

The Operator Reported That...

The appellant was the driver.
ANPR/CCTV was used.
The Notice to Keeper was sent on 18/10/2021.
A response was recieved from the Notice to Keeper.
The ticket was issued on 14/10/2021.
The Notice to Keeper (ANPR) was sent in accordance with PoFA.
The charge is based in Contract.

The Operator Made The Following Comments...

At the time of the parking event, the appellants vehicle was observed as entering a site which requires a valid cashless (Tap2Park) payment session to be purchased against your vehicle registration.

The vehicle entered at 10:48 and exited at 10:53. Within this time the driver had failed to purchase parking cover against the vehicle registration. As no parking cover was purchased, this PCN was subsequently issued. Notice of the terms and conditions of parking is served by way of numerous large warning signs, one of which is located at the entrance to the site.


The appellant makes several statements, all of which are incorrect. The Creditor is Regent Parking as per the documentation that has been sent in respect of the PCN.

With regards to consideration periods the appellant accepts that they were waiting for a passenger and it can be inferred from this, that they were not reading the signage and have therefore accepted the terms and conditions.

They also uploaded the NTK, photo request with 2 photos, and site photographs and signage map and other preloaded documents that include the signage at the site.

Any further advice? How should I continue?

Coupon-mad

Respond, like we said.  We can't tell you what to put but pick holes in it.

stefandobra

Coupon-mad said:

Respond, like we said.  We can't tell you what to put but pick holes in it.

i've added all the information you've provided in the initial claim so now I will just submit I guess.

Coupon-mad

If you mean you are NOT going to play email tennis then you are accepting losing.  The advice is to respond.  And again, and again...

stefandobra

So...today teh IAS appeal was dismissed, as expected. 

Dear Stefan Andrei,

The Independent Appeals Service (IAS) has received a decision from the Independent Adjudicator regarding your recent appeal for the below PCN.

Parking Charge Number (PCN): -----
Vehicle Registration: ------
Date Issued: 14/10/2021

Appeal Outcome: Dismissed

The Adjudicators comments are as follows:

"It is important that the Appellant understands that the adjudicator is not in a position to give his legal advice. The adjudicator's role is to look at whether the parking charge has a basis in law and was properly issued in the circumstances of each particular case. The adjudicator's decision is not legally binding on the Appellant (it is intended to be a guide) and they are free to obtain independent legal advice if they so wish. However, the adjudicator is legally qualified (a barrister or solicitor) and decides the appeal according to their understanding of the law and legal principles.

The terms of this appeal are that I am only allowed to consider the charge being appealed and not the circumstances of other drivers or other parking events. The guidance to this appeal also makes it clear that I am bound by the law of contract and can only consider legal challenges not mistakes or extenuating circumstances. I am satisfied that the Operator's signage, which was on display throughout the site, makes it sufficiently clear that the terms and conditions are in force at all times and that a PCN will be issued to drivers who fail to comply with the terms and conditions, regardless of a driver's reasons for being on site or any mitigating factors. While noting their comments, it is clear from the evidence provided to this appeal that the Appellant did indeed enter and use the site otherwise than in accordance with the displayed terms by failing to ensure that their vehicle was properly registered with a valid payment, having been allowed an adequate consideration period prior to the charge being issued. It is the driver's (rather than a third party's) responsibility to ensure that the terms and conditions of parking are properly complied with.

I am satisfied that the Operator has proven their prima facie case. Whilst having some sympathy with the Appellant's circumstances, once liability has been established, only the Operator has the discretion to vary or cancel the parking charge based on mitigating circumstances. Accordingly this appeal is dismissed.
"

As your appeal has been dismissed, the Independent Adjudicator has found, upon the evidence provided, that the parking charge was lawfully incurred.

As this appeal has not been resolved in your favour, the IAS is unable to intervene further in this matter.

You should contact the operator within 14 days to make payment of the charge. 

Should you continue to contest the charge then you should consider obtaining independent legal advice.

Yours Sincerely,
The Independent Appeals Service

What happens next? What do you suggest is my next step?

Coupon-mad

Standard guff.  Means nothing.

You know what happens next from all the other forum posts about any IPC firms.

stefandobra

Coupon-mad said:

Standard guff.  Means nothing.

You know what happens next from all the other forum posts about any IPC firms.

Basically ignore everything that comes from the parking company and debt collectors.

If they take it to court only then take action.

Umkomaas

stefandobra said:

Coupon-mad said:

Standard guff.  Means nothing.

You know what happens next from all the other forum posts about any IPC firms.

Basically ignore everything that comes from the parking company and debt collectors.

If they take it to court only then take action.

Correctomundo! 👍