Wilful entrapment to enforce civil contract

[Andy Prowse]

I recently entered a private car park controlled by ARDPark Ltd, however there were no signs at the point of entry stating this was a private car park and/or terms and conditions appalled. After entering the car park there were numerous term and conditions signs but after reading them I left the car park within 9 minutes. I received a PCN

i appealed to the operator, the IAS and the ADR and every one dismissed the appeal stating that signage at the entrance is not required and only terms and conditions signs are required.

IMHO ARDPark Ltd, the IPC, IAS and the ADR have all ignored my grounds of appeal which were:

International Parking Community (IPC) Codes of Practice:

A. Schedule 1 - Signange (No signs at the car park entrance)

B. 5 - Motorists Using Private Land - 5.3

C. Schedule 5 - Auditing - B)

D. Legal and Additional Obligations - 25.1 b)


Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008


Part 2; Prohibitions (4) Prohibitions of the Promotion of an Unfair Commercial Practice; The promotion of any unfair commercial practice by a Code owner of a code of conduct is prohibited.


(Misleading Actions 5)


3(b) it concerns any failure by a trader to comply with a commitment contained in a code of conduct which the trader has undertaken to comply with.

The frustrating thing is that the car parking community is literally a closed shop and they clearly flout the rules whilst protecting each other. I am now trying to escalate this to the CTSI

[des8]

So you now know that companies who "manage" private car parks, and their "independent" appeal panels are nothing of the sort.

Eventually you will receive a court claim.
Presumably you identified the driver in your various appeals ... a pity

[Andy Prowse]

Yes, it is now very clear that the IPC are the IAS and the ADR is the IAS.

There is no such thing in the world of PCN’s as an independant appeal and the Car Park Operatiors know that, hence their bullying arrogant enforcement tactics. ARDPark Ltd use Ridings Recoveries as their enforcement company to collect monies. However, that company is owned by the same man and wife who own ARDPark, both companies even have the same bank account details.

The entire business of Car Park Management is rotten to the core.

[atticus]

Anyone with familiarity with these forums will know to check, always to assume that there is no such thing as free parking. "Car parking management" is a business model, part of that model being to pursue non payers aggressively.

[Andy Prowse]

A brilliant and very interesting document, thank you.

As I was bound by the ADR findings who of course found in favour of the car park operator I have now had to pay “under written protest” the £100 PCN.

However, despite appealing the PCN and the IAS stating payment should not be made whilst appealing the operator is now pursing me for a £60 late payment fee.

Apparantly there was an issue with my IAS appeal process which resulted in the appeal time period expiring. The IAS notified the operator of this who then agreed to go directly to the ADR process. It was at that time I discovered that the operator has full access to the IAS appeal system. Apparantly that gives the operator the god given right to make even more money for doing absolutely nothing.

The Car Park Operator business is almost as messed up as the Post Office business with Horizon. Some would say (not me of course) they are corrupt bullies.

[atticus]

why would you not say that?

[Andy Prowse]

I’m not fully averse with liable etc laws …. If asked in private I would say exactly that and more.

Lets hope the county court can see that too