Do you think court will overule IAS verdict or shall i pay fine- help appreciated

hatepcncharge

Dear Forum Members,

I would be very grateful for your advice on whether it is worthwhile to defend a Parking Charge Notice in court after my IAS appeal has been dismissed, or whether I should simply pay the £100 charge.

Background:

• Date of incident: 27 June 2025

• Location: Hayes & Harlington (controlled land)

• Circumstances: I was transporting my 73-year-old mother to Heathrow. She recently underwent knee surgery, has reduced mobility, and suffers from a medically diagnosed overactive bladder. During the journey she suffered an uncontrollable bladder emergency, which required immediate intervention.

• Action taken: With no accessible facilities or drop-off bays nearby, I had to stop briefly in the controlled area to assist her to the nearest accessible toilet. I caused no obstruction and remained only for the minimum necessary time.

• Evidence: GP medical letter confirming this was a genuine emergency.

• Code of Practice: I referred to Annex F1E and F2-1B of the Government’s Single Code of Practice, which states PCNs should not be enforced when a driver is forced to stop due to an unavoidable emergency.

What has happened so far:

• I appealed to the operator → rejected.

• I appealed to the IAS → also rejected, with no recognition of the medical emergency.

My questions:

1. Given the above, do I have a reasonable chance of success in small claims court if the operator issues proceedings?

2. Or is it wiser to pay the £100 now and avoid further stress/cost?

3. If it goes to court, what process should I expect and what risks do I face?

My understanding so far:

• IAS is not truly independent and rarely upholds appeals.

• In small claims court, I can present the GP letter and emergency circumstances, and a judge may well accept this as a valid defence.

• If I win → case dismissed, no costs.

• If I lose → likely total around £175–£220 (charge, capped legal fees, court costs). No CCJ as long as paid within 30 days.

I would really value your views on whether this case is strong enough to defend, or whether to settle now.

Thank you for your help.

cannugec5

I know nothing of the court process or your chance of winning. However. 

In my humble opinion an urgent need for a toilet is not an emergency. By which I mean it is not life threatening. As you have stated she has a medically diagnosed condition then this incident was, in fact, ‘predictable’ to a certain extent. Perhaps appropriate protective underwear could have been used? This might seem a diabolical suggestion to you and your mother, but I’m wondering if she was going to fly, in which case what precautions had been taken for the duration of the flight wherein toilets are inaccessible? 

This is probably not the reply you were hoping for when you have already gone to the trouble to appeal. 

I assume by ‘controlled area’ this is an area restricted for the purposes of terrorism prevention surrounding an airport. If so I can understand the lack of empathy. 

QrizB

hatepcncharge said:.

I would really value your views on whether this case is strong enough to defend, or whether to settle now.

Nobody settles.

Everybody defends.

Almost everybody wins if you pay attention to the advice of the regulars.

elsien

cannugec5 said:

I know nothing of the court process or your chance of winning. However. 

In my humble opinion an urgent need for a toilet is not an emergency. By which I mean it is not life threatening. As you have stated she has a medically diagnosed condition then this incident was, in fact, ‘predictable’ to a certain extent. Perhaps appropriate protective underwear could have been used? This might seem a diabolical suggestion to you and your mother, but I’m wondering if she was going to fly, in which case what precautions had been taken for the duration of the flight wherein toilets are inaccessible? 

This is probably not the reply you were hoping for when you have already gone to the trouble to appeal. 

I assume by ‘controlled area’ this is an area restricted for the purposes of terrorism prevention surrounding an airport. If so I can understand the lack of empathy. 

It would have been a lack of empathy wherever they parked. Private parking companies are not in it for empathy,  they’re there to get as much money as possible regardless of circumstances.

hatepcncharge

Will send evidence for people to view

hatepcncharge

evidence and responses attached as below

hatepcncharge

cannugec5 said:

I know nothing of the court process or your chance of winning. However. 

In my humble opinion an urgent need for a toilet is not an emergency. By which I mean it is not life threatening. As you have stated she has a medically diagnosed condition then this incident was, in fact, ‘predictable’ to a certain extent. Perhaps appropriate protective underwear could have been used? This might seem a diabolical suggestion to you and your mother, but I’m wondering if she was going to fly, in which case what precautions had been taken for the duration of the flight wherein toilets are inaccessible? 

This is probably not the reply you were hoping for when you have already gone to the trouble to appeal. 

I assume by ‘controlled area’ this is an area restricted for the purposes of terrorism prevention surrounding an airport. If so I can understand the lack of empathy. 

it was not heathrow area it was a controlled land privately owned by a group of flat, mother had stool and urine mix which even prematively one cant control

ChirpyChicken

Right your overthinking this
Do nothing unless you get a court claim or you move
The ias is irrelevant 

patient_dream

AS ABOVE ...... The IAS is a complete SHAM and you should not take any notice of their rubbish, god knows why government trusted them in the first place and right now, government should terminate them as a ATA

With your story a judge will favour you and no doubt award you costs.

Interesting sign though saying .... 
NO GRACE PERIOD APPLIES ?

hatepcncharge

It is indeed SHAM. Today i got a letter from PCN saying they will forward the details to bailiffs if i dont pay within 28 days

kryten3000

No they won't.  They will send to a debt recovery agency such as Debt Recovery Plus (DRP) or Direct Collection Bailiffs Limited (DCBL).  Neither will send anyone round to your house because at this stage the "debt" is not actually a real one.  DCBL use their name and reputation to intimidate when they have no power or standing.

Unless the parking company obtains a judgment against you, the debt is just an unpaid invoice and you have no obligation to pay.