Excel: PCN for parking in disabled bay at Peel Centre

[stevestocky2012]

Re: Excel: PCN for parking in disabled bay at Peel Centre

hi M1

hope you enjoyed the footie :-) whoever you were watching

IAS 'response to operator' text box cannily doesn't allow for cut n paste, worth noting! And, they limit a response to 1000 words, and your's is running at 1,328. I will have a go at cutting it down, but it may dampening what appears an excellent response. Seems like the industry does not support the accused in these circumstances! Deadline looming 23:59....

thanks
steve

[mystery1]

Re: Excel: PCN for parking in disabled bay at Peel Centre

Save it as a file.

M1

[stevestocky2012]

Re: Excel: PCN for parking in disabled bay at Peel Centre

hi M1,

Perhaps unsurprisingly IAS has rejected my appeal: "I am satisfied that the Operator has proved their prima facie case. Once liability has been established, only the Operator has the discretion to vary or cancel the parking charge based on mitigating circumstances. Accordingly this appeal is dismissed. "
Do I now ignore, if so where will that lead to?
Do I pay up and then it will go away (don't want to as the penalty does not fit the 'crime'! and they are just cowboys who don't deserve my or anybody else's £)

thanks
steve

[mystery1]

Re: Excel: PCN for parking in disabled bay at Peel Centre

Do I now ignore, if so where will that lead to?

Maybe nowhere and maybe court. There are hundreds, if not thousand, of claims being processed for the Peel centre at the moment on the various fora. The results will be quite interesting and i wouldn't be at all surprised if the nearest court gets so swamped that they put them all on hold pending a test case. Neither would i be surprised to see very few actual hearings as cases get dropped close to the trial date just like CEL did for a while, using the threat of a courtroom as a debt collection tool rather than a dispute resolution.

Was that the whole decision ? They never bothered to say they think that Loake applies and you are wrong ? Just " pay up you tosser" ? Arseholes

M1

[stevestocky2012]

Re: Excel: PCN for parking in disabled bay at Peel Centre

The full rejections states: ""The guidance to this appeal makes it clear that I am bound by the law of contract and can only consider legal challenges not mistakes or extenuating circumstances. The terms of this appeal are that I am only allowed to consider the charge being appealed and not the circumstances of other drivers or other parking events. I am satisfied that the markings in and around the bay that the Appellant’s vehicle parked in make it clear that disabled parking only is allowed in the bay. I consider it reasonable to assume that by parking in a clearly marked disabled bay a driver must also clearly display a Blue Badge in order to prove that they are entitled to park in such a bay. In such situations it is the driver’s responsibility to ensure that a Blue Badge is correctly displayed.
On this occasion the Appellant appears to accept that no badge was displayed. The photographic evidence shows that no Blue Badge was available for inspection. As no Blue Badge was available for inspection in the vehicle I feel it is appropriate to have issued a Parking Charge Notice (PCN). The images provided of the Appellant’s vehicle are time and date stamped, clear and of high quality. I am satisfied that the correct vehicle is identified and that the correct Appellant is pursued. The Operator provides photographic images of the Appellant’s vehicle from various angles, which clearly show that the vehicle is parked in a disabled bay while not displaying a valid Blue Badge. I am satisfied that the Appellant was clearly parked within a disabled bay. In such bays, the terms and conditions of parking mean that if the driver cannot clearly display a Blue Badge they can either park elsewhere, or remain parked and agree to pay the charge. Whether or not they are a Blue Badge holder, the contractual terms make it clear that any driver parked in a disabled bay without clearly displaying a valid Blue Badge agrees to pay a charge.
I am satisfied that the Operator has proved their prima facie case. Once liability has been established, only the Operator has the discretion to vary or cancel the parking charge based on mitigating
circumstances.
Accordingly this appeal is dismissed."

and goes on, " 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."



"

[mystery1]

Re: Excel: PCN for parking in disabled bay at Peel Centre

So they never touched on Elliot v Loake and keeper liability despite being complained about and told the driver was not you ? WOW. I did half expect a piss off we're not interested but to just completely ignore the issue rather than blindly dismiss it !

There isn't an appeal available but i would be moaning to both IPC & IAS that they haven't even ruled on your submission on keeper liability. Not that i think you have much hope though.

M1