Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Southernsoftie_jo
    • By Southernsoftie_jo 3rd Apr 17, 5:31 PM
    • 50Posts
    • 16Thanks
    Southernsoftie_jo
    IAS APPEAL....feedback appreciated
    • #1
    • 3rd Apr 17, 5:31 PM
    IAS APPEAL....feedback appreciated 3rd Apr 17 at 5:31 PM
    Hi

    I'm about to do my IAS appeal having been rejected by the PPC (no surprise), and would value some feedback before I go ahead. I'm aware there is some debate as to whether an appeal with IAS is of value or not and that it is highly likely to be rejected, however it seems the right thing to me to do.

    Background....my car was parked on a private estate in a designated parking bay, with no visitor permit displayed hence the ticket from U.K. CPM. It was sent through the post.

    The 'private estate' starts upon taking an exit off a roundabout which is public highway so it is not apparent that you have entered private land.

    There is a sign, which does contain the words private land and sets out the requirement of a permit for all users etc etc however it is at least 7 foot high and the writing is tiny. I can barely read it when standing underneath it, not to mention a few feet away from it in a moving vehicle having just turned off the roundabout.

    There is also a sign a few meters away from where the car was parked but it is also extremely high with small text and nance not legible from the car.

    There is a repeated sign on the property that is snapped in half. The entrance sign I took photos of a few weeks ago has now deteriorated further in as much as large parts of it are missing, so it isn't of robust quality either.

    Hopefully the following will now make sense. I've taken the angle of poor signage=no contract exists

    Thanks for your input......

    (Don't be too harsh, this was knocked together with a baby and toddler at my feet and I did my research before asking for help, including reading the newbie thread)

    Appeal.......

    As an Accredited IPC Operator UKCPM are required to adhere to the IPC Code of Conduct.

    UKCPM have failed to adhere to Section 2.1 of The Code, with regards their signage meeting minimum standards. The IPC Code states that its members 'must conform to the requiremnets as set out in Schedule 1' (Section 2.2)

    Schedule 1 states that 'Entrance signs should make it clear that the motorist is entering onto private land'

    The Code requires IPC members to 'adequately display any signs intended to form the basis of contract between the creditor and the driver'.

    Signage should 'be clearly legible and placed in such a position (or positions) such that a driver of a vehicle is able to see them clearly upon entering the site or parking a vehicle within the site'.

    It should 'contain text appropriate to the position of the sign and the relevant position of the person who it is aimed at'.

    The photograph evidence shows the entrance sign positioned on a pole, perpendicular to the road at a height of about 7 feet high. The sign is not of a large enough size to afford motorists the chance to read and understand the terms and conditions before deciding to remain in the car park. The lettering is too small to be visible to a driver when considering the height of the sign and the likely position of a motorist (in their car) upon entering the site. This contravenes the IPC Code, Schedule 1.

    This entrance sign is on a 30mph road which is an exit off a roundabout - drivers will be passing this sign at a speed which renders it unnoticeable given its position and size.

    The sign near where the vehicle was parked is positioned in the same manner and of the same size as the entrance sign. It is not evident from this sign that private land has been entered because it is not clearly visible from the parking space. Letters look smaller when positioned up high and the angle of sight renders words less readable due to their perspective.!!!8232;
    The signage is in clear breach of the aforementioned points detailed in the IPC Code which UKCPM should adhere to.

    Furthermore, the Consumer Rights Act 2015 states a 'requirement for transparency' in establishing a contract and 'a trader must ensure that a written term of a consumer contract, or a consumer notice in writing, is transparent'.

    I also refer to 'Vine -v- London Borough of Waltham Forest [2000] EWCA Civ 106' which found in favour of the driver, that they could not be deemed bound by the terms of the contract, where they were not clearly visible.


    In this instance a contract cannot be said to have been established between the UKCPM and the driver as the driver was not made aware of the terms or that the land was private property. In the absence of a contract, terms cannot be said to have been 'breached' and as such the 100 parking charge is unenforceable because it was not agreed to.
Page 4
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 27th Jun 18, 8:41 PM
    • 8,685 Posts
    • 8,600 Thanks
    KeithP
    Southernsoftie_jo, it would be really good if you could turn off Smart punctuation on your iPhone/iPad as your posts are difficult to read.
    .
    • Southernsoftie_jo
    • By Southernsoftie_jo 27th Jun 18, 8:54 PM
    • 50 Posts
    • 16 Thanks
    Southernsoftie_jo
    Happily! Thanks for the tip it's been driving me nuts!
    • Southernsoftie_jo
    • By Southernsoftie_jo 1st Jul 18, 11:29 PM
    • 50 Posts
    • 16 Thanks
    Southernsoftie_jo
    I've studied post 2 of NEWBIES along with some other relevant posts and formulated this response to the LBC from Gladstone's. Await your feedback with thanks!


    Gladrags....

    I am in receipt of your Letter Before Claim dated 21st June 2018 (received 26th June 2018)

    Your letter lacks specificity and breaches both the requirements of the previously applicable Practice Direction - Pre-Action Conduct (paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c)) and the new Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (paragraphs 3.1(a)-(d), 5.1 and 5.2. Please treat this letter as a formal request for all of the documents / information that the protocol now requires your client to provide. Your client must not issue proceedings without complying with that protocol. I reserve the right to draw any failure of the Claimant to comply with the protocol to the attention of the court and to ask the court to stay the claim and order your client to comply with its pre-action obligations, and when costs come to be considered.

    As solicitors you must surely be familiar with the requirements of both the Practice Direction applicable pre-1 October and the Protocol which applies thereafter (and your client, as a serial litigator of small claims, should likewise be aware of them). As you (and your client) must know, the Practice Direction and Protocol bind all potential litigants, whatever the size or type of the claim. Its express purpose is to assist parties in understanding the claim and their respective positions in relation to it, to enable parties to take stock of their positions and to negotiate a settlement, or at least narrow the issues, without incurring the costs of court proceedings or using up valuable court time. It is astounding that a firm of Solicitors are sending a consumer a vague and unevidenced 'Letter before Claim' in complete ignorance of the pre-existing Practice Direction and the new Protocol.

    Nobody, including your client, is immune from the requirements and obligations of the Pre-action Protocol.


    I require you to comply with your obligations by sending me the following information/documents in accordance with section 5.1 of the Pre-action Protocol, which were not included in your letter:

    whether interest or other charges relating to the debt are continuing

    details of how to proceed if the debtor wishes to discuss payment options

    a Financial Statement form

    In addition I require the following information, from your client:

    1. An explanation of the cause of action .

    2. Whether they are pursuing me as driver or keeper.

    3. Whether they are relying on the provisions of Schedule 4 of POFA 2012.

    4. What the details of the claim are: Where it is claimed the vehicle was parked, for how long, how the monies being claimed arose and have been calculated.

    5. Is the claim for a contractual breach, if so what is the date of the agreement, the names of the parties in the contract and a copy of the contact.

    6. Is the claim for trespass and if so, on what basis.

    7. A copy of the contract with the landowner under which they assert authority to bring the claim, As required by the IPC code of conduct section B clause 1.1

    8. A copy of any alleged contract with the driver.

    9. A plan showing where any signs were displayed, relative to where the vehicle was parked.

    10. Details of the signs displayed (size of sign, size of font, height at which displayed) including any known damage.

    11. A copy of the Information Sheet and Reply form

    Until your client has complied with its obligations and provided this information, I am unable to respond properly to the alleged claim and to consider my position in relation to it, and it is entirely premature (and a waste of costs and court time) for your client to issue proceedings. Should your client do so, then I will seek an immediate stay pursuant to paragraph 15(b) of the Practice Direction and an order that this information is provided

    Yours faithfully,
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 1st Jul 18, 11:54 PM
    • 60,110 Posts
    • 73,246 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    It is astounding that a firm of Solicitors are sending a consumer a vague and unevidenced 'Letter before Claim' in complete ignorance of the pre-existing Practice Direction and the new Protocol.
    I would remove that because the LBC isn't in complete ignorance of the PAP, it pays lip service to it!
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • hopelesslylost
    • By hopelesslylost 3rd Jul 18, 2:11 PM
    • 1 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    hopelesslylost
    Hi All

    I have been reading this forum for a while (and following the Newbies advice), but this is my first post.

    I am in almost exactly the same situation as Southernsof (above).

    Should I just copy post #63 and send it as a letter?

    I would like to argue that the parking signs were small/broken/badly placed. Is now the time to do this?

    many thanks
    HopelesslyLost
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 4th Jul 18, 11:31 AM
    • 60,110 Posts
    • 73,246 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Welcome!

    You need to click back to page one (see my signature below) and hit NEW THREAD.

    And if you were trying to, don't view this forum on a phone, it makes the buttons/headers and options - and threads - harder to find.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • Southernsoftie_jo
    • By Southernsoftie_jo 6th Jul 18, 11:08 PM
    • 50 Posts
    • 16 Thanks
    Southernsoftie_jo
    Response to LBC sent! Can anyone advise what the next possible scenarios are now?

    Are we at the situation of either proceeding to court or they walk away from it?

    Thanks!
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 6th Jul 18, 11:34 PM
    • 8,685 Posts
    • 8,600 Thanks
    KeithP
    Yes, but before issuing a court claim they should of course respond to your letter.
    .
    • Southernsoftie_jo
    • By Southernsoftie_jo 4th Aug 18, 1:55 PM
    • 50 Posts
    • 16 Thanks
    Southernsoftie_jo
    Hi,

    We are now around 30 days since I sent the response to the LBC.

    To date, no response from Gladstone's. If they are meant to reply to me ahead of issuing court papers, does this mean it looks like they have walked away?

    I'm wondering if they will ignore my letter and just issue court papers
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 4th Aug 18, 2:07 PM
    • 8,685 Posts
    • 8,600 Thanks
    KeithP
    Wait patiently. Nothing else for you to do.
    .
    • Southernsoftie_jo
    • By Southernsoftie_jo 8th Aug 18, 7:11 PM
    • 50 Posts
    • 16 Thanks
    Southernsoftie_jo
    We replied to Gladstone's LBC and this is their response. Basically they have ignored my requests for documents in my letter and just repeated everything they have previously stated.

    They suggest we pay !!!55358;!!!56611; or reply to them in 30 days. Have we just entered into a game of letter tennis?

    Any thoughts on next step?

    They said they enclosed a copy of the sign displayed st the site, which they did not enclose.

    Thanks for any advice, it is much appreciated.

    https://ibb.co/dsvGDz
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 8th Aug 18, 7:39 PM
    • 8,685 Posts
    • 8,600 Thanks
    KeithP
    Any thoughts on next step?

    Thanks for any advice, it is much appreciated.
    Originally posted by Southernsoftie_jo
    My thoughts/advice hasn't changed. See post #70.

    Just make a note of their failings, they may come in handy later.
    .
    • Southernsoftie_jo
    • By Southernsoftie_jo 10th Aug 18, 7:51 AM
    • 50 Posts
    • 16 Thanks
    Southernsoftie_jo
    Thanks KeithP, so just to clarify, do you suggest ignoring again? Wait patiently for court papers to arrive?

    Am happy to just keep sending letters back and forth and see who gets bored first.

    Are we now at the point of they either issue court papers, or they don't?
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 10th Aug 18, 8:16 AM
    • 8,145 Posts
    • 10,680 Thanks
    beamerguy
    Thanks KeithP, so just to clarify, do you suggest ignoring again? Wait patiently for court papers to arrive?

    Am happy to just keep sending letters back and forth and see who gets bored first.

    Are we now at the point of they either issue court papers, or they don't?
    Originally posted by Southernsoftie_jo
    If they have ignored your requests, then it's tennis until
    they do.

    With the Gladstones losses of late, one must wonder if
    they can't read, don't understand, or a total lack of
    knowledge
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 10th Aug 18, 10:26 AM
    • 3,130 Posts
    • 3,839 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    Respond back
    Note their failings, and enclosing a copy of your letter for their reference
    Point out that,d espite their assertions otherwise, no copy of the signs were enclosed

    POint out that they had 30 days to provide the documetns OR to state why they cannot. As thy have not explained why they have not supplied X, Y, Z then they still have AA days let to get this to you.
    • Southernsoftie_jo
    • By Southernsoftie_jo 13th Aug 18, 8:03 PM
    • 50 Posts
    • 16 Thanks
    Southernsoftie_jo
    Thanks both.

    What's the general consensus please on sending letters, ought they to be signed for or by law is my letter considered as having been sent and received?

    Cheers
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 13th Aug 18, 8:11 PM
    • 8,685 Posts
    • 8,600 Thanks
    KeithP
    Never ever send any letter by any signed for service.

    All that does is allow the intended recipient to refuse to sign and then the item isn't delivered. All you then have is proof of non-delivery - not quite what you want.

    Send it standard first class and get a free Certificate of Posting from the Post Office counter. The item is deemed delivered two working days later and it is for the PPC to prove otherwise.
    .
    • Snakes Belly
    • By Snakes Belly 14th Aug 18, 2:42 PM
    • 128 Posts
    • 96 Thanks
    Snakes Belly
    @Southern. I am at a similar stage to yourself in the process and like yourself I have been through two appeals process. Since the LBC I have sent a rebuttal and two further letters. I would draw your attention to this taken from the newbies thread.

    'DO RESPOND - if it later goes to a hearing then the Judge will see this correspondence. Seize the moment to point out how the firm have been unreasonable, and not complied with the new pre-action protocol for debt claims:'

    I have also put comments in my letters about the lack of impartiality of the IAS. I have used the Dracula quote. Naturally your case is different but we have both gone through the bruising experience of appealing to IAS and this is something that the claimant's representative may pick up on.

    Nolite te bast--des carborundorum.
    • Southernsoftie_jo
    • By Southernsoftie_jo 14th Aug 18, 7:39 PM
    • 50 Posts
    • 16 Thanks
    Southernsoftie_jo
    Thanks @Snakes for pointing that out. Keep us posted with your progress!
    • Southernsoftie_jo
    • By Southernsoftie_jo 15th Aug 18, 5:19 PM
    • 50 Posts
    • 16 Thanks
    Southernsoftie_jo
    Quick query re 'grace periods' when parking.....

    The main issue with this alleged offence is that no permit was displayed when parked on private land.

    But the vehicle was not parked for more than 10 mins. They have a photo showing where it was parked and the time, and the lack of permit, but they do not have evidence of it being there over 10 mins (because it wasn't!)

    Is this a valid point? If so, is it up to me to prove it wasn't there (not sure how that's achieved) or for them to prove it was?

    Thanks!
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

2,026Posts Today

9,384Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • Ta ta... for now. This August, as I try and do every few yrs, I'm lucky enough to be taking a sabbatical. No work,? https://t.co/Xx4R3eLhFG

  • RT @lethalbrignull: @MartinSLewis I've been sitting here for a good while trying to decide my answer to this, feeling grateful for living i?

  • Early days but currently it's exactly 50 50 in liberality v democracy, with younger people more liberal, older more? https://t.co/YwJr4izuIj

  • Follow Martin