What next?, letter from Gladstones

second attempt
.
1. I am the defendant,

---

2. I deny any liability to the Claimant whatsoever on the following basis:

Insufficient Signage.

I. The PCN was issued on a road where I had parked on many previous occasions, there was not on this occasion nor previous occasions any notices that this is a private road.
II. I found a sign after I found the PCN on my vehicle which was positioned approximately 2 meters from the ground and of a size that was impossible to read, and it would be reasonable to assume from the location and position that the sign itself is making reference to the building site behind, rather than the road which is not marked as private. This sign is too high and the text too small for a driver to see whilst in the vehicle, meaning it is not obvious to the motorist.

I refer to the IPC Code of Practice, Part E, Entrance signs should
i. Make it clear that the Motorist is entering Private Land
ii. Signs should be obvious to the Motorist.
iii. Text should be of a such a size and in a font that can be easily readable by the motorist.
The sign in question did not meet any of the above criteria as evidenced in
Exhibit 1: My own photograph of the sign, location and position
Exhibit 1a: Photographs supplied Parking Control Management (UK)Ltd of the sign, location and position.


3.The IAS is not considered an independent appeals system due to the Assessors' names remaining secret and well-publicised concerns over a conflict of interest. The IAS is a trading name of the IPC who are owned by the same people as the Claimant's Solicitors, Gladstones, who are now bringing this claim. Given this, I do not accept its dismissal of my appeal, as the rejection was not based on my appeal or on any facts related to the alleged contravention.

a) The Prima Facia case of the “The Operator” was minimal.
b) The photographic evidence supplier to the IAS assessor by “The Operator”
i) Prove my appeal that the sign at the entrance to the road is unreadable.
ii) Most are irrelevant to the actual case, as there are no marked bays in the location that I parked.

c) I am not willing to accept the decision of the IAS adjudicator who dismissed the appeal, for the reasons stated above.





4. This Claimant has not complied with pre-court protocol (as outlined in the new Pre Action Protocol for Debt Claims, 1 October 2017). As an example as to why this prevents a full defence being filed at this time, a parking charge can be for trespass, breach of contract or a contractual charge. All these are treated differently in law and require a different defence. The wording of any contract will naturally be a key element in this matter, and a copy of the alleged contract has never been provided to the Defendant.