Smart Parking Overstay Help :)

torturerforfun

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82039460#Comment_82039460

Perfect thank you very much, I'll keep you posted 😀

torturerforfun

Do they just back down usually prior to it going to arbitration?

cooldude255220

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82040386#Comment_82040386

I've recently helped with a Smart Parking one where they conceded rather than providing a response. So it's interesting that they've not done so in this case. But the operator winning/the IAS siding with the motorist is far, far from guaranteed. The odds are stacked the other way. Remember, this is just an opportunity to try and nip it in the bud. IAS Decisions (if this stage doesn't go your way) are not binding on the motorist

I think the fact that they haven't conceded yet means they're not likely to before the IAS makes a decision. But who knows.

Gr1pr

When they were BPA AOS members they were losing a lot, or conceding

I believe that they will test the waters since moving to the IPC AIS list, plus they started to comply with Pofa2012 last year too, so as newbies to the IAS system, and Pofa2012 compliance, there isnt much data to go on

Nothing is guaranteed, but its worth a punt , which you did

torturerforfun

Thanks for the responses, i'll let you know what occurs and keep fingers crossed 😊

Coupon-mad

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82040641#Comment_82040641

It's not arbitration.

torturerforfun

Hi All, I've not heard anything back since the Operator's Prima Facie Case and my subsequent response that @cooldude255220 helped with 🙌 It's now been a month, does this mean nothing is going to happen or…..

Gr1pr

It means waiting a bit longer

torturerforfun

Hi All,

So i have now had a response, and its not what I wanted 😥 is there anything else that can be done, or is that the end of the road?

Appeal Outcome: Dismissed

The Adjudicators comments are as follows:

"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 Appellant raises as an issue the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and purports that the Operator has failed to comply with the requirements therein.
I must point out that whilst the Act does need to be complied with in cases where the Operator wishes to avail themselves of the keeper liability provisions under Schedule 4, they are not obliged to do so where they do not.
Instead, the operator is entitled to rely either on the legal presumption that the keeper of the vehicle was also the driver (which they are entitled to do in the absence of credible evidence to the contrary) or on an acceptance that they were driving at the material time.
On the present facts, the compliance or otherwise with the Act, is not a relevant issue."

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 28 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

Gr1pr

Its the end of the appeal road

Ignore any powerless debt collectors letters

Come back to this thread if you receive a Letter of Claim giving you 30 days notice, or a Money Claim