• Welcome to the LegalBeagles Consumer and Legal Forum.
    Please Register to get the most out of the forum. Registration is free and only needs a username and email address.
    REGISTER
    Please do not post your full name, reference numbers or any identifiable details on the forum.

London Parking Solutions!! Appeal with IAS.

Collapse
Loading...
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • London Parking Solutions!! Appeal with IAS.

    We received a notice through the post from London Parking Solutions or PCN Parking Solutions for London Parking Solutions! Which when I looked into turned out to be a charge for improper parking on a private industrial estate. I checked and found that we were there to deliver a damaged vehicle to a repairer on the site and our Truck was parked directly outside their premises. So we appealed directly to PCN / London Parking Solutions, which of course they rejected. So following their appeals procedure I filed a case with IAS, which again they refuted. I have now asked for arbitration but wanted to check if I had done the right thing:

    You completed the appeal on 12/12/2016 13:17:32

    Our vehicle was on the Business Park to Deliver a disabled vehicle to Spectrum Vehicle Repairs, Unit 10 Fitzroy Business Park. Upon arrival we found there were no spaces outside the unit big enough to take our vehicle and allow the safe unloading of the broken down vehicle we had been asked to deliver to them. The vehicle was parked outside Spectrum when the picture was taken. Our driver had left the vehicle with emergency beacons and hazards illuminated. The driver left the vehicle to ask Spectrum where we could position the vehicle to allow safe unloading, as to unload the recovery truck we need a space longer than an articulated lorry. I have attached a copy of the vehicle tracker showing our vehicle arrived at Fitzroy Business park at 11:38, and the PCN was issued at 11:39! I have also included a copy of the digital job card showing why we were there.

    The operator made their Prima Facie Case on13/12/2016 17:35:11

    The Operator Reported That...

    The appellant was the keeper.
    The operator is seeking keeper liability in accordance with PoFA..
    ANPR/CCTV was used.
    The Notice to Keeper was sent on 28/11/2016
    A response was recieved from the Notice to Keeper.
    The ticket was issued on 24/11/2016
    The Notice to Keeper (ANPR) was sent in accordance with PoFA.
    The charge is based in Contract.

    The Operator Made The Following Comments...

    THE LAND IN QUESTION IS PRIVATE AND IS THEREFORE SUBJECT TO TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF PARKING.

    BY WAY OF CONTRACTUAL WARNING SIGNAGE, WHICH IS DISPLAYED AT THE SITE, MOTORISTS ARE MADE AWARE THAT PARKING ON THE ROADWAY OR FOOTPATH IS NOT PERMITTED.

    IN THE EVENT THAT A VEHICLE DOES CHOOSE TO PARK ON THE ROADWAY OR FOOTPATH, THEN THE MOTORIST BY WAY OF AFFIRMATION, HAS AGREED TO PAY THE OPERATOR A FIXED AGREED UPON SUM OF MONEY. IN ESSENCE THIS SUM IS A CORE CONTRACTUAL PRICE TERM.

    SHOULD THE MOTORIST NOT AGREE TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF PARKING, THEN THEY ARE FREE TO REMOVE THEIR VEHICLE FROM THE SITE AND TO PARK AT AN ALTERNATE LOCATION.

    AS PER THE OPERATORS PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE APPELLANT WAS PARKED AT THIS LOCATION AT THE TIME OF THIS PARKING EVENT.

    IT IS FURTHER APPARENT FROM THE PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE THAT THE APPELLANT WAS PARKED WITHIN A CLEAR LINE OF SIGHT OF AT LEAST ONE LARGE CONTRACTUAL WARNING SIGN.

    WHILST THE APPELLANT HAS PROVIDED EVIDENCE THAT THE VEHICLE HAD STOPPED APPROXIMATELY 1 MINUTE PRIOR TO BEING RECORDED, THIS IS LARGELY IRRELEVANT AS THE VEHICLE WOULD HAVE PASSED 2 LARGE SIGNS ON THE WAY INTO THIS SITE WHICH CLEARLY STATE - NO PARKING.

    THE OPERATOR SUBMITS THAT BASED ON THIS, THERE WOULD BE NO REAL NEED FOR A GRACE PERIOD IN THIS SCENARIO.

    FOR THE REASONS SET OUT ABOVE WE SAY THAT THE APPELLANT IS LIABLE FOR THIS PARKING CHARGE NOTICE.

    Tags: None

  • #2
    Re: London Parking Solutions!! Appeal with IAS.

    From the description that there were signs saying "No Parking" then these were forbidding signs. On the one hand the sign says no parking but on the other they are saying they are contracting with you to park, which is a nonsense. If this is indeed the case, and you will need some photos of the signs.

    Just had a look at Google Street view and the sign says "No Unauthorised Vehicles." That is not a contractual offer to park and you were authorised by the people you were delivering to.

    There are articles about such signs being forbidding and therefore there is no parking contract on the Parking Pranksters blogspot. Courts have also agreed

    Edit: There is a sign on the other gate post but how the heck can you read all that small text as you are manoeuvring into the estate. Unfortunately GSV inside the estate is several years ago and there are no signs in existence.

    Can the people you were delivering to not get this claim quashed? Or give a letter stating that you were authorised to be there. As you have found out the IAS will reject anyway.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: London Parking Solutions!! Appeal with IAS.

      I do have the images of the vehicle and the signs, which I have attached. I apologise for the low qulaity, looks like they are driving round the site videoing the site with a poor quality video recorder, then taking pictures of a screen showing the images!!
      Attached Files

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: London Parking Solutions!! Appeal with IAS.

        Some information that has come to light is that London Parking Solutions are a member of the IPC which is owned by United Trade and Industry Ltd, which lists its Directors as Mr William Kenneth Hurley & Mr John Llewellyn Gladstone Davies. The solicitors used if (when) the appeal fails is Gladstone Solicitors, which also has its Directors listed as Mr William Kenneth Hurley & Mr John Llewellyn Gladstone Davies. How can this not be a conflict of interest and shed doubt upon the appeals process?? It appears to me to be a giant cash cow?? Any thoughts??

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: London Parking Solutions!! Appeal with IAS.

          Is the ticket in the name of a company ? Can i see the ticket ?

          M1

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: London Parking Solutions!! Appeal with IAS.

            mystery1 I have added a copy of the notice we received below

            Any advice is greatly appreciated.
            Attached Files

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: London Parking Solutions!! Appeal with IAS.

              Do you have the back or page 2 ?

              M1

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: London Parking Solutions!! Appeal with IAS.

                Both sides uploaded.
                Attached Files

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: London Parking Solutions!! Appeal with IAS.

                  Any idea how long IAS usually take to reject an appeal?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: London Parking Solutions!! Appeal with IAS.

                    So I was thinking that as the signs forbid parking at anytime then there cannot be a charge as it would amount to trespass?? However upon reading through the guidance to section 56 and schedule 4 of POFA i cam across the following:

                    Looking through the guidance to section 56 and schedule 4 POFA i came across this:

                    5.2 For Schedule 4 to apply the driver of a vehicle must first be liable for
                    unpaid parking charges. There are broadly two situations where a driver
                    could become liable for parking charges:
                    a. where a driver has entered into a contract to park on private land and
                    failed to comply with the terms and conditions of that contract; or
                    b. where a driver has trespassed on private land where signs showing
                    charges for unauthorised parking are displayed.

                    8.1 A driver can be liable to pay a charge for parking on land where parking
                    is not invited and they are trespassing. For Schedule 4 to apply to
                    trespass situations the landholder needs, as a minimum, to place clear
                    signs stating that parking is not permitted and setting out the charge that
                    will be sought for unauthorised parking (i.e. damages for trespass). For
                    example “No parking – charge £50 for unauthorised parking”. Charges
                    sought for trespass must be appropriate (see Q1 of FAQ).

                    Would they not just argue point 5.2 (b) and 8.1??

                    However what I also found in the guidance was this:

                    2.1 Landholders who are members of a Government Accredited Trade
                    Association (ATA) may ask the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency
                    (DVLA) for details of the vehicle keeper. DVLA decide whether to release
                    data under reasonable cause provisions (see
                    www.dft.gov.uk.dvla.data.aspx). Currently the only DVLA accredited
                    trade association for parking companies is the British Parking
                    Association’s Approved Operator Scheme (AOS).

                    So does that mean only members of the BPA have the right to request the information??


                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: London Parking Solutions!! Appeal with IAS.

                      I would write to the IAS and state :-

                      With regards to the appeal by the registered keeper xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx i would like to state that London Parking Solutions has failed to comply with the protection of freedoms act 2012 schedule 4 paragraph 9 in many ways.

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

                      The warning require by 9 (2) (f)

                      "(f)warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given—


                      (i)the amount of the unpaid parking charges specified under paragraph (d) has not been paid in full, and


                      (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver,


                      the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid;"

                      As keeper liability is not established and a company cannot be a driver the appeal should be allowed.





                      When sending you MUST also send a copy of the pcn AT THE SAME TIME.

                      M1

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: London Parking Solutions!! Appeal with IAS.

                        Thank you M1. will send that off today.

                        Regards

                        Comment

                        View our Terms and Conditions

                        LegalBeagles Group uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to create a secure and effective website. By using this website, you are consenting to such use.To find out more and learn how to manage cookies please read our Cookie and Privacy Policy.

                        If you would like to opt in, or out, of receiving news and marketing from LegalBeagles Group Ltd you can amend your settings at any time here.


                        If you would like to cancel your registration please Contact Us. We will delete your user details on request, however, any previously posted user content will remain on the site with your username removed and 'Guest' inserted.
                        Working...
                        X