Appeal rejected for private parking fine - what next?

KeithP

B789 said:

KeithP said:

B789 said:

Why do you think they are saying you admitted to being the driver?

I don't think they are saying that are they?

The IAS are claiming that that is what VCS has said:

Even those words you have ringed don't say that the appellant admitted being the driver.    

That just says the operator has decided that the appellant was the driver.

Le_Kirk

Grizebeck said:

The IPC/IAS/Gladstones love elliot vs loake but it never works . So you will lose at the ias but I'd put my money on you winning in court

Elliot v Loake was a criminal case and has been rubbished by judges in parking cases such as C8DP79CC.

Umkomaas

If you haven't already seen this, then the following link might be of interest - it's that referred to by @Le_Kirk, above. 

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2017/06/excel-lose-in-cardiff-judge-explains.html

It's over 6 years now since a Judge explained in words of one syllable to Excel Parking (VCS's sister Company) why Elliot v Loake doesn't apply in the context of private parking charges.  As the IAS adjudications are (allegedly) made by solicitors and barristers, you have to ask the question as to why they are routinely and continually ignoring the decision of DJ McKay in the case of Excel Parking Services Ltd v Mrs. Lynzi Evans (Claim no: C8DP79CC  in the Cardiff Civil Justice Centre). 

Coupon-mad

More importantly, the case of Excel v Smith was on appeal so that's a persuasive decision with a transcript kicking about somewhere.

pustit

Tell them to refer the case to the police since they are using highway signs and it is beyond their remit

B789

KeithP said:

B789 said:

KeithP said:

B789 said:

Why do you think they are saying you admitted to being the driver?

I don't think they are saying that are they?

The IAS are claiming that that is what VCS has said:

Even those words you have ringed don't say that the appellant admitted being the driver.    

That just says the operator has decided that the appellant was the driver.

I am not saying that the appellant has admitted to being the driver. However, the IAS are "claiming" that the appellant has done so, according to VCS.

If there is no evidence of the appellant admitting to being the driver then, clearly, either or both VCS and the IAS are lying, fabricating evidence, not telling the truth... call it what you like.

Ange1402

Ok. So my plan of action is to respond to VCS via IAS citing the fact that Elliot v Loake isn't relevant then quote case law (Excel v Evans and I'll look at Excel v Smith) that shows why it isn't relevant. 

I will let you know how IAS respond.

As always, thanks for your comments.

Not_A_Hope

My partner was driving (he was coming to pick me up)

I am assuming you might have some evidence you could use to potentially show the court that you were flying back to the airport at the time someone else was driving your car and falling foul of the VCS stopping scam.

Ange1402

Yes I'm sure I can locate the ticket. Though not sure if the timings back me up all that much as he was caught at the time that I had already landed so they could (and probably will) say that I could still have been driving the car. I will include it anyway.

Coupon-mad

I mean it would be madness for a PPC to suggest you were picking yourself up...!  Go in hard on the flight evidence.