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
    • grisld
    • By grisld 12th Jul 18, 9:40 PM
    • 7Posts
    • 2Thanks
    grisld
    PCM - Rejection letter received - Should I appeal to IAS?
    • #1
    • 12th Jul 18, 9:40 PM
    PCM - Rejection letter received - Should I appeal to IAS? 12th Jul 18 at 9:40 PM
    Dear Forum

    I got a PCN for my car being briefly stopped on a private road. The road is well signposted re. no stopping etc... My car was only stopped for long enough to read the signs (no more than a couple of mins) and then left the private road. (They take the biscuit these companies!)

    So I appealed the initial letter using the generic template mentioned on this forum not stating who the driver was and I have now received a response advising my appeal is rejected and I can either pay or appeal to IAS. Is there any guidance here regarding what to do in this situation?

    The letter says:
    'You parked in a manner whereby you agreed to pay a charge. The parking attendent recorded that the vehicle was parked outside of a marked bay.' ...

    It goes on to say I have a number of options:
    1) Pay the PCN with the discounted amount within 14 days or the full charge after this time.
    2) 'If you believe the decision is incorrect the Independent Appeals Service provides an Alternative Dispute Resolution scheme for disputes of this type.'
    It says if I use the IAS then the offer of a discount is withdrawn.

    It continues to say that if I 'do nothing' they will seek to recover monies owed via debt recovery and this may proceed to Court. Also advising that if no payment is received with 28 days then they may refer my case to their instructed debt recovery service and/or solicitors at which point the charge increase by about 60%.

    Can anyone advise of good practice regarding this? Has anyone experience of appealing to IAS? If so is there a template for such appeals that has been successful? In short is it worth it?

    Your help/advice is very much appreciated.
    With best wishes
    Last edited by grisld; 12-07-2018 at 10:16 PM.
Page 1
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 12th Jul 18, 9:46 PM
    • 36,244 Posts
    • 20,512 Thanks
    Quentin
    • #2
    • 12th Jul 18, 9:46 PM
    • #2
    • 12th Jul 18, 9:46 PM
    Everyone is politely asked to read up on this in the Newbies FAQ thread near the top of the forum before starting a new thread

    Go there now to learn about the game you are now caught up in

    In particular understand the futility of appeals to IPC companies and the IAS

    Throughout here you are advised never to reveal who was driving

    You need to edit your post to remove details of who was driving
    • Fruitcake
    • By Fruitcake 12th Jul 18, 9:49 PM
    • 36,997 Posts
    • 83,594 Thanks
    Fruitcake
    • #3
    • 12th Jul 18, 9:49 PM
    • #3
    • 12th Jul 18, 9:49 PM
    Please double check and confirm the name/initials of the parking company.

    There are many companies with similar initials.
    Last edited by Fruitcake; 12-07-2018 at 9:51 PM.
    I married my cousin. I had to...
    I don't have a sister.

    All my screwdrivers are cordless.
    "You're Safety Is My Primary Concern Dear" - Laks
    • grisld
    • By grisld 12th Jul 18, 10:16 PM
    • 7 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    grisld
    • #4
    • 12th Jul 18, 10:16 PM
    • #4
    • 12th Jul 18, 10:16 PM
    Thanks Quentin
    I did not believe that I had mentioned any details regarding who was driving here. I have referred to 'my car' and not to a named driver. If even this is too much then I'm happy to edit and remove?
    I read the forum post as you suggested and it does say that PCM appeals to IAS can sometimes be successful as they may enter a 'no contest'.
    If I was to appeal then it would be based on my vehicle only being stopped for long enough to read the signs and then move on (a couple of mins). Is it worth it?
    Many thanks
    Last edited by grisld; 12-07-2018 at 10:18 PM.
    • grisld
    • By grisld 12th Jul 18, 10:18 PM
    • 7 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    grisld
    • #5
    • 12th Jul 18, 10:18 PM
    • #5
    • 12th Jul 18, 10:18 PM
    Hi Fruitcake
    It is Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd (PCM).
    Best wishes
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 12th Jul 18, 11:01 PM
    • 59,409 Posts
    • 72,564 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #6
    • 12th Jul 18, 11:01 PM
    • #6
    • 12th Jul 18, 11:01 PM
    Yes try an IAS appeal as PCM are so useless and admitted on Watchdog they 'make it up sometimes'.

    Try searching the forum for PCM IAS predatory seconds to find a recent one written.
    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.

    • grisld
    • By grisld 13th Jul 18, 12:45 PM
    • 7 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    grisld
    • #7
    • 13th Jul 18, 12:45 PM
    • #7
    • 13th Jul 18, 12:45 PM
    Thanks Coupon
    I think I found the one, Hayes and Harlington.
    Best wishes
    • grisld
    • By grisld 15th Jul 18, 1:39 PM
    • 7 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    grisld
    • #8
    • 15th Jul 18, 1:39 PM
    • #8
    • 15th Jul 18, 1:39 PM
    Dear Team

    I would very much appreciate if someone could give my appeal the once over and let me know if any changes are necessary?

    Many thanks

    IPC IAS Appeal

    Dear IAS

    I am the registered keeper of the vehicle reg xxxxxx and I contend that I am not liable for the parking charge notice xxxxxxx. I wish to appeal against this notice.

    In relation to this appeal it is my view that the following case law, legislation and guidance is relevant.

    IPC Accredited Operator Scheme Code of Practice, Sections:
    14. Predatory Tactics
    14.1 You must not use predatory or misleading tactics to lure drivers into incurring parking charges. Such instances will be viewed as a serious instance of non-compliance and will be dealt with under the sanctions system as defined in schedule 2 to the Code.
    And
    15. Grace Periods
    15.1 Drivers should be allowed a sufficient amount of time to park and read any signs so they may make an informed decision as to whether or not to remain on the site.
    15.2 Drivers should be allowed a sufficient amount of time to leave a site after a pre-paid or permitted period of parking has expired.
    And
    Part E Schedule 1 - Signage

    Caselaw:
    Jopson Vs Homeguard, case number 9GF0A9E
    19. The appellant!!!8217;s case could also be put in another way. The purported prohibition was upon !!!8220;parking!!!8221;, and it is possible to draw a real and sensible distinction between pausing for a few moments or minutes to enable passengers to alight or for awkward or heavy items to be unloaded, and parking in the sense of leaving a car for some significant duration of time.
    20. Neither party was able to direct the court to any authority on the meaning of the word !!!8220;park!!!8221;. However, the Shorter Oxford Dictionary has the following: !!!8220;To leave a vehicle in a carpark or other reserved space!!!8221; and !!!8220;To leave in a suitable place until required.!!!8221; The concept of parking, as opposed to stopping, is that of leaving a car for some duration of time beyond that needed for getting in or out of it, loading or unloading it, and perhaps coping with some vicissitude of short duration, such as changing a wheel in the event of a puncture. Merely to stop a vehicle cannot be to park it; otherwise traffic jams would consist of lines of parked cars. Delivery vans, whether for post, newspapers, groceries, or anything else, would not be accommodated on an interpretation which included vehicles stopping for a few moment for these purposes.

    Legislation:
    Consumer Rights Act 2015 - Section 69
    Contract terms that may have different meanings
    1. If a term in a consumer contract, or a consumer notice, could have different meanings, the meaning that is most favourable to the consumer is to prevail.

    In relation to the above guidance, caselaw and legislation I will set out my argument as follows:

    1)
    The car was not parked. It had stopped or paused briefly to enable the driver to read the signs. The time stamps on the photos submitted by PCM show that the driver had not stopped for more than a couple of minutes at most. This is only enough time to read the signs that are difficult to read from a car as they are quite high up, about 7 or 8 feet, and with small print.
    In relation to this point it is my view that the IPC Accredited Operator Scheme Code of Practice Section 15.1 applies:
    !!!8216;Drivers should be allowed a sufficient amount of time to park and read any signs so they may make an informed decision as to whether or not to remain on the site.!!!8217;

    I would contend that !!!8216;a sufficient amount of time!!!8217; is at least a few minutes, particularly given that the signs are not easily readable from a vehicle and as such could be seen as a means of attempting to entrap a driver into leaving their vehicle in order to do so.

    In order for a contract to be valid it is necessary that the offeror gives the offeree sufficient time to read and understand the contract. I would submit that the amount of time given for the driver to read the awkwardly placed signs from the car (no more than two minutes) and to make a decision about whether to enter into a contract with the landowner/operator about remaining on site is not enough time to do so. In any event the driver decided that they did not wish to remain on site and promptly left, therefore I would contend that no contract can be said to have been accepted or in place between the operator and the driver.


    2)
    Part E, Schedule 1 of the IPC Accredited Operator Scheme Code of Practice, states:
    !!!8216;Text should be of such a size and in a font that can be easily read by a motorist having regard to the likely position of the motorist in relation to the sign.!!!8217;

    I would argue that given that the signs are 7 or 8 feet high, above the ground level, and that the sign is small and the print is also small that therefore it is not easy to read by the motorist and so does not comply with this part of the guidance. I would again suggest that this could be viewed as a means of entrapping a motorist into leaving their vehicle, adding weight to an argument that the vehicle was parked. It is my view that this could therefore be interpreted in relation to Section 14.1 of the IPC Accredited Operator Scheme Code of Practice, Predatory Tactics.

    3)
    In order to comply with the IPC Accredited Operator Scheme Code of Practice, PCM would need to agree:

    1) that a driver is entitled to a reasonable amount of time to consider the terms.
    2) that signs can be easily read by a motorist
    3) that a driver is entitled to consider the terms before making the decision to park

    In order to understand the terms relevant to the area of private land in question there can be no assumption or requirement by the operator for the driver to adhere to any terms prior to those terms being understood and agreed. To suggest otherwise would be contradictory.

    4)
    I would argue that in order to be parked the driver must leave the vehicle or have stopped the vehicle for more than a few minutes.
    The Oxford English Dictionary defines the verb !!!8216;park!!!8217; as:
    !!!8216;bring (a vehicle that one is driving) to a halt and leave it temporarily!!!8217;.

    In Jopson Vs Homeguard (above) the Judge Harris QC states:
    !!!8216;it is possible to draw a real and sensible distinction between pausing for a few moments or minutes to enable passengers to alight or for awkward or heavy items to be unloaded, and parking in the sense of leaving a car for some significant duration of time.!!!8217;
    !!!8216;merely to stop a vehicle cannot be to park it!!!8217;.

    It is noted from the photographic submissions of PCM that the driver did not leave the vehicle at any time and in relation to the above caselaw from Judge Harris QC I would submit that the driver had only paused for a few moments or minutes, in this case to enable them to read the signs.
    I would therefore suggest that the above definitions of !!!8216;parking!!!8217; as described by both the Oxford English dictionary and by Judge Harris QC in Jopson Vs Homeguard do not apply in this case.

    I would further like to bring the IAS attention to Section 69 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, which clearly states:
    !!!8216;If a term in a consumer contract, or a consumer notice, could have different meanings, the meaning that is most favourable to the consumer is to prevail.!!!8217;
    The driver is the consumer in this instance, so I would argue that the definitions and terms I have stated above should be interpreted in the way that is most favourable to the driver of the vehicle.

    5)
    I am deeply troubled and concerned by the practices of PCM at the site in question and would invite the IAS to consider whether Predatory Tactics are being exploited as clarified in Section 14.1 of the IPC Accredited Operator Scheme Code of Practice.

    I would go further to suggest that if the operator is concerned about drivers on the private land in question that they should consider changing the signs to either !!!8216;No Entry!!!8217;, or put a gated entrance in place as is the case in many privately owned roads and car parks. This would avoid any misunderstanding and time and trouble for innocent motorists. I would suggest that given the proximity to a busy train station that the failure to do so could be interpreted as predatory tactics and merely seen as a way of PCM generating revenue for themselves and the land owner.

    I look forward to hearing from you.

    Yours sincerely
    !!!8230;


    CC. MP for the area
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 15th Jul 18, 4:25 PM
    • 59,409 Posts
    • 72,564 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #9
    • 15th Jul 18, 4:25 PM
    • #9
    • 15th Jul 18, 4:25 PM
    Looks worth a try as long as you also upload Jopson v Homeguard.

    No harm done if you lose, and I still think PCM are worth a prod with a stick at IAS stage!
    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.

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

2,493Posts Today

9,450Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • RT @mmhpi: "Two years ago, I was in the fortunate position to be able to found @mmhpi... I?m incredibly proud of the work the team there is?

  • It means you should either have an annual policy in place, or book a specific single trip policy when you book https://t.co/oBDx8TmzQU

  • The fight to divorce mental health and debt... https://t.co/G3pyGje6Kh

  • Follow Martin