IAS DECISIONS (2025 onwards, until - we hope - they are banned)

Umkomaas

James_Poisson said:

Coupon-mad said:

Oh yes.

Mentioned in this load of plausible corporate-speak 'we aren't the problem' drivel from Will Hurley:

https://www.transportxtra.com/publications/transit/news/79770/the-ipc-laying-the-foundations/

What a load of utter garbage that is, their intransigent hassling of the motorist with escalating costs is apparently just to be fair to other motorists:

"The escalation stage isn’t about punishment. It’s about maintaining fairness for the motorists who do the right thing. It’s part of the deterrent structure that encourages compliance and keeps the system balanced".

Do people actually sit listening to this drivel nodding their heads in agreement?

….. and the reality:

“I created the model of 'admin fees' for debt recovery because ticket value was so low that nobody would make any money.”
G Osner - founder and CEO of the debt recovery firm ZZPS Limited.

patient_dream

James_Poisson said:

Coupon-mad said:

Oh yes.

Mentioned in this load of plausible corporate-speak 'we aren't the problem' drivel from Will Hurley:

https://www.transportxtra.com/publications/transit/news/79770/the-ipc-laying-the-foundations/

What a load of utter garbage that is their intransigent hassling of the motorist with escalating costs is apparently just to be fair to other motorists:

"The escalation stage isn’t about punishment. It’s about maintaining fairness for the motorists who do the right thing. It’s part of the deterrent structure that encourages compliance and keeps the system balanced".

Do people actually sit listening to this drivel nodding their heads in agreement?

James_Poisson said:

Coupon-mad said:

Oh yes.

Mentioned in this load of plausible corporate-speak 'we aren't the problem' drivel from Will Hurley:

https://www.transportxtra.com/publications/transit/news/79770/the-ipc-laying-the-foundations/

What a load of utter garbage that is their intransigent hassling of the motorist with escalating costs is apparently just to be fair to other motorists:

"The escalation stage isn’t about punishment. It’s about maintaining fairness for the motorists who do the right thing. It’s part of the deterrent structure that encourages compliance and keeps the system balanced".

Do people actually sit listening to this drivel nodding their heads in agreement?

Totally AGREE

"The International Parking Community’s Will Hurley looks to the future"

The only future  for the IPC and HURLEY must be closure.  

The IPC and IAS are simply not fit for purpse and dangerous to the general piblic

Coupon-mad

James_Poisson said:

Coupon-mad said:

Oh yes.

Mentioned in this load of plausible corporate-speak 'we aren't the problem' drivel from Will Hurley:

https://www.transportxtra.com/publications/transit/news/79770/the-ipc-laying-the-foundations/

What a load of utter garbage that is, their intransigent hassling of the motorist with escalating costs is apparently just to be fair to other motorists:

"The escalation stage isn’t about punishment. It’s about maintaining fairness for the motorists who do the right thing. It’s part of the deterrent structure that encourages compliance and keeps the system balanced".

Do people actually sit listening to this drivel nodding their heads in agreement?

The only conclusion is that someone (policy team and/or the responsible Minister) in this current MHCLG must have done, because they went right down this rabbit hole in the Options Assessment (no option of a ban in it). They even gave the extortion its own acronym (DRF) and said in principle they were not against an added fee.

Sigh...my goodness, why did I bother?

Astonishingly naive ... and plain wrong based on two binding case law authorities and four statute laws:

- ParkingEye v Beavis

- ParkingEye v Somerfield

- The POFA 2012, schedule 4

- The CRA 2015

- The DMCC Act 2024

- And the policy decisions that led to the Late Fee Regulations add-ons being deemed 'inappropriate' for consumer contracts.

Flipping heck. You cannot have a £100 PCN (private invoice) that "has to" (Supreme Court) cover the cost of enforcement, then on day 29 let this horrific industry add a fake 'fee' to "cover the cost of enforcement".

Counting the same minor costs twice.

Inventing a 'Late Fee' especially for this industry is not just a dangerous precedent but it breaches several laws and is plain stupid.

Every bit as naive as ring fencing 'debt recovery' only to the parking industry's mates who invented this false fee.

Come off it MHCLG! On MSE we could get our MPs to block the Code if you try this.

Right now they are sharing the 'DRF' spoils £35/£35 when duped consumers sadly get bullied into paying £170 and the industry is laughing at this Government.

patient_dream

The MHCLG is just a farce

Right now they are sharing the spoils when duped consumers pay £170 and the industry is laughing at this Government

Just like the rest of the population ??

ChirpyChicken

The lead Ajudicator can also be reached at david.finney@theias.org