Contractual Parking Charge Notice

[lookingforward]

Re: Contractual Parking Charge Notice

Additional files are same as before i.e. site map (showing a 404 error), copy of signage x2

Charge notice is attached



Appreciate your help as always

[mystery1]

Re: Contractual Parking Charge Notice

Same again then

M1

[lookingforward]

Re: Contractual Parking Charge Notice

Thanks M1

Is there any advantage is awaiting the outcome of the 1st appeal or just put this in straight away

Thx

[mystery1]

Re: Contractual Parking Charge Notice

None now they have put their prima facie case in.

M1

[lookingforward]

Re: Contractual Parking Charge Notice

Ok thanks, I've put same details in today

[lookingforward]

Re: Contractual Parking Charge Notice

Just got a reply (on a Sunday ?? ) and it's not good news

Appeal Outcome: Dismissed

The Adjudicators comments are as follows:

"The appellant appears to rely solely on a breach of the relevant Protection of Freedom Act schedule. The information contained in the notice to keeper is entirely sufficient and in no way invalidates the issue of the parking charge. I am satisfied that the appellant's vehicle overstayed the maximum permitted parking time, and that the keeper is liable for this charge. This appeal is dismissed. "

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.

Should you continue to contest the charge then you should consider obtaining independent legal advice.


That's the first one and the second is the same

Appeal Outcome: Dismissed

The Adjudicators comments are as follows:

"Having dealt with exactly the same argument in an earlier appeal, my findings have not altered. There is no breach of the Protection of Freedom Act schedule. The notice to keeper gives all details required. There was an overstay at the site in question. The keeper is being pursued for the parking charge. This appeal is dismissed. "

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.

Should you continue to contest the charge then you should consider obtaining independent legal advice.


Are there any further options ?

Thx

[lookingforward]

Re: Contractual Parking Charge Notice

Been delving about online and the general view is that the IAS is a bit of a kangaroo court with an 80% rejection promise to the car parking firms.

I also came across this quote

The signage says that the charge is for a breach of the conditions so it is not a contractual charge but a claim for damages due to a breach of contract. They are an utter shower and have completely destroyed the chances of the parking co now getting a penny legally. As you can imagine, \i am gutted for them.
What to do next? Absolutely nothing. Make them waste their money chasing you. Do not contact either organisation again. I suspect that you will get a reminder letter followed by demands from either Gladstones or Miah solicitors that you pay up or they will be taking action on behalf of their clients. In this circumstance they are acting as debt collectors and have no brief as yet to go any further. Gladstones are the IAS so there is a massive conflict of interest and whilst they do take people to court they lose big time. this generates fortunes for them in fees but loses the parking co the said same money and more and so you will find a lot of disgruntled parking co's now avoiding Gladstones when it comes to pressing their claim.
If you do start to get demands from Gladstones or any other solicitor then you must write back and deny that any money is owed because of the error in law they have adopted as their position and thus they are doomed to fail in any action and will incur your defence costs for their client. Copy this to the parking co and it will be the last you hear.

This are the parking notices G24 used in their case





2nd one to my untrained eye seems to be £90 for breach of terms (contract ?) in which case should daughter just hold off and wait to see if anything court related appears then and I quote

"write back and deny that any money is owed because of the error in law they have adopted as their position and thus they are doomed to fail in any action and will incur your defence costs for their client. Copy this to the parking co and it will be the last you hear."

To recap daughter was driving sons car and parked in this car park whilst at work. Obviously don't want eithers credit shot with a CCJ and I know neither will want court apperance.

[mystery1]

Re: Contractual Parking Charge Notice

Well that sucks. There is no appeal against such a bad decision, sadly.

The options now are,

1. Ignore and see if they have the balls to go to court before the 6 year statute of limitations kicks in.
2. Name the driver and give their address so the keeper is no longer liable as per 5 (1)b of the protection of freedoms act 2012 schedule 4. They may still chase the keeper but there would be a cast iron defence to any claim in those circumstances, over and above other defence points. The driver, in theory, should get their own chance to appeal but i can't see them ever winning an appeal.
3. Pay.

M1

[lookingforward]

Re: Contractual Parking Charge Notice

Thanks M1.

Seems they refuse a lot of appeals sadly.

Think I'll get her to sit tight for now and see what comes through the post, I think now shes looking at £180.00 for both fines.

Couple of questions if I may.

Can she name herself further down the line as we don't want to be contacting them at all at present ?

What's your view on the signage/breach of contract wording issue, in particular this part "write back and deny that any money is owed because of the error in law they have adopted as their position and thus they are doomed to fail in any action and will incur your defence costs for their client. Copy this to the parking co and it will be the last you hear." ?

If that would work then I think I'll definately get her to sit tight and see what occurs. She's jobless at the moment anyway.

Thx

[mystery1]

Re: Contractual Parking Charge Notice

Can she name herself further down the line as we don't want to be contacting them at all at present ?

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/...dule/4/enacted

Right to claim unpaid parking charges from keeper of vehicle


4(1)The creditor has the right to recover any unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the vehicle.


(2)The right under this paragraph applies only if—


(a)the conditions specified in paragraphs 5, 6, 11 and 12 (so far as applicable) are met;

Conditions that must be met for purposes of paragraph 4


5(1)The first condition is that the creditor—


(a)has the right to enforce against the driver of the vehicle the requirement to pay the unpaid parking charges; but


(b)is unable to take steps to enforce that requirement against the driver because the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver.





Anytime before a court claim is issued.

It's a tough ask to argue about contracts after Beavis. It can be done http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co...-contract.html but when it's a free time one like that is then i think it's a case of "beavis applies - you lose" for many judges.

M1

[lookingforward]

Re: Contractual Parking Charge Notice

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/...dule/4/enacted

Right to claim unpaid parking charges from keeper of vehicle


4(1)The creditor has the right to recover any unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the vehicle.


(2)The right under this paragraph applies only if—


(a)the conditions specified in paragraphs 5, 6, 11 and 12 (so far as applicable) are met;

Conditions that must be met for purposes of paragraph 4


5(1)The first condition is that the creditor—


(a)has the right to enforce against the driver of the vehicle the requirement to pay the unpaid parking charges; but


(b)is unable to take steps to enforce that requirement against the driver because the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver.





Anytime before a court claim is issued.

It's a tough ask to argue about contracts after Beavis. It can be done http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co...-contract.html but when it's a free time one like that is then i think it's a case of "beavis applies - you lose" for many judges.

M1

Thx I see Beavis was last Nov and the stuff I was reading was September ...damn

Ok so just a waiting game, bloody hell been doing that for the last 6 years :-(

Not mine but because it's my childrens it feels like mine

What's your view on why the boyfriend never got a fine, he's parked there loads of times and nothing, she only parked there a couple of times and got a fine both times. His cars an 02 plate

[mystery1]

Re: Contractual Parking Charge Notice

Maybe somebody doesn't like her, likes him, is only there periodically and she is unlucky, she parks in a different spot within the carpark, the attendant lets people of who wear black ................

M1

[lookingforward]

Re: Contractual Parking Charge Notice

Surely though if it's a camera then it can't be random/at a whim as you're saying ?
He's parked there many, many times, she's parked there twice and got done both times, could it be dependent on the age of teh car and is that even legal ?

[mystery1]

Re: Contractual Parking Charge Notice

Indeed, i forgot it was anpr and not a ticket on the vehicle.

Perhaps he drives too close to the vehicle in front and the camera doesn't pick it up ?

It's all academic anyway.

M1

[lookingforward]

Re: Contractual Parking Charge Notice

Well seems she has to pay then.


The more I read about the IAS the more a joke it is as the parking notice states that if you appeal you lose the right to pay a reduced fee, that in itself is a joke.

Bit like the banks old charges were OTT before the public outcry, how can £90.00 be justified ?