Jump to content
  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 1st it is not a fine  2nd a DCA is NOT A BAILIFF and have  ZERO powers on any debt, regardless upon it's type.   until/unless you receive a letter of claim pers i'd simply ignore everything now for either speculative invoice (i believe there are two?)    
    • is there a 90dec action cut off gas tap safety lever by the side of the one you believe is yours and can you get to it?   dx  
    • @dx100ukIt just moved less than decimals because we briefly used hot water, while the other one increased by 3m^3.   So, how should I proceed? Do I just call EON and make them aware? How will the charge or refund me if they do not know the initial number for the meter (the one 1 year ago in the meter I should have been reading)?   Thanks!
    • Alright great appreciate the quick response/advice will send it asap, when you say keep it very wide do you mean don't limit this part of the SAR?   "Please note that I require disclosure of any personal data which you hold on me for the entire period of my dealings with you."   Will update when I hear something back,   Thanks.  
    • Has there ever been any success stries re chargeback with BOS? How much hope do I have? I wrote to FOS and to the bank again requesting a chargeback in writing too. 
  • Our picks

    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies
    • Oven repair. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/427690-oven-repair/&do=findComment&comment=5073391
      • 49 replies
    • I came across this discussion recently and just wanted to give my experience of A Shade Greener that may help others regarding their boiler finance agreement.
      We had a 10yr  finance contract for a boiler fitted July 2015.
      After a summer of discontent with ASG I discovered that if you have paid HALF the agreement or more you can legally return the boiler to them at no cost to yourself. I've just returned mine the feeling is liberating.
      It all started mid summer during lockdown when they refused to service our boiler because we didn't have a loft ladder or flooring installed despite the fact AS installed the boiler. and had previosuly serviced it without issue for 4yrs. After consulting with an independent installer I was informed that if this was the case then ASG had breached building regulations,  this was duly reported to Gas Safe to investigate and even then ASG refused to accept blame and repeatedly said it was my problem. Anyway Gas Safe found them in breach of building regs and a compromise was reached.
      A month later and ASG attended to service our boiler but in the process left the boiler unusuable as it kept losing pressure not to mention they had damaged the filling loop in the process which they said was my responsibilty not theres and would charge me to repair, so generous of them! Soon after reporting the fault I got a letter stating it was time we arranged a powerflush on our heating system which they make you do after 5 years even though there's nothing in the contract that states this. Coincidence?
      After a few heated exchanges with ASG (pardon the pun) I decided to pull the plug and cancel our agreement.
      The boiler was removed and replaced by a reputable installer,  and the old boiler was returned to ASG thus ending our contract with them. What's mad is I saved in excess of £1000 in the long run and got a new boiler with a brand new 12yr warranty. 
      You only have to look at TrustPilot to get an idea of what this company is like.
        • Thanks
      • 3 replies
    • Dazza a few months ago I discovered a good friend of mine who had ten debts with cards and catalogues which he was slavishly paying off at detriment to his own family quality of life, and I mean hardship, not just absence of second holidays or flat screen TV's.
      I wrote to all his creditors asking for supporting documents and not one could provide any material that would allow them to enforce the debt.
      As a result he stopped paying and they have been unable to do anything, one even admitted it was unenforceable.
      If circumstances have got to the point where you are finding it unmanageable you must ask yourself why you feel the need to pay.  I guarantee you that these companies have built bad debt into their business model and no one over there is losing any sleep over your debt to them!  They will see you as a victim and cash cow and they will be reluctant to discuss final offers, only ways to keep you paying with threats of court action or seizing your assets if you have any.
      They are not your friends and you owe them no loyalty or moral duty, that must remain only for yourself and your family.
      If it was me I would send them all a CCA request.   I would bet that not one will provide the correct response and you can quite legally stop paying them until such time as they do provide a response.   Even when they do you should check back here as they mostly send dodgy photo copies or generic rubbish that has no connection with your supposed debt.
      The money you are paying them should, as far as you are able, be put to a savings account for yourself and as a means of paying of one of these fleecers should they ever manage to get to to the point of a successful court judgement.  After six years they will not be able to start court action and that money will then become yours.
      They will of course pursue you for the funds and pass your file around various departments of their business and out to third parties.
      Your response is that you should treat it as a hobby.  I have numerous files of correspondence each faithfully organised showing the various letters from different DCA;s , solicitors etc with a mix of threats, inducements and offers.   It is like my stamp collection and I show it to anyone who is interested!
        • Thanks
        • Like

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1874 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hello all


I recently received a parking charge notice from G24. I had recently had one from parking eye where by browsing these forums I was not the driver on either occasion and was able to understand how to appeal to them at the stage I was at and was successful overturned within days.


I made the mistake of thinking the same process would work this time and my appeal was rejected. I was invited to appeal to the IAS and conducted my appeal based on their code of practice. They seemed reputable and that the charge was groundless as there own code of practice was in my opinion not adhered to.


I have received an email today that this appeal has been dismissed with the below response:


Dear xxxxxxx,


The Independent Appeals Service (IAS) has received a decision from the Independent Adjudicator regarding your recent appeal. Please see below for the full details.


Parking Charge Number (PCN): xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Vehicle Registration: xxxxxxxxxx

Date Issued: 19/08/2015


Appeal Outcome: Dismissed


The Adjudicators comments are as follows:


"It is important that the appellant understands that the adjudicator is not in a position to give legal advice. The adjudicator's role is to look at whether the parking charge has a basis in law and was properly issued in the circumstances of each particular case. The adjudicator's decision is not legally binding on the appellant (it is intended to be a guide) and the Appellant is free to obtain independent legal advice if they so wish.


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. I am also only allowed to consider the charge being appealed and not the circumstances of other drivers or other parking events. In this appeal procedure the onus this is on the Appellant to prove their case on the balance of probabilities.


On considering images provided it is clear that sufficient amounts of signage existed on the site at the time of issuing the Parking Charge Notice (PCN). The Operator shows evidence that the maximum amount of time allowed is 120 minutes and that the Appellant’s vehicle was on site for a total of 152 minutes. As it appears to be accepted that the Appellant was on site in excess of the maximum parking period I am satisfied that the PCN has a basis in law.


Various documents have been provided by both the Operator and the Appellant, all of which I have considered. I am satisfied to the required standard that the signage on site complies with currently regulations. I am satisfied that the Appellant has been made reasonably aware of the terms contained within these signs. The Operator is able to show their signage at the entrance and throughout the site. By staying on the site for longer than the 120 minute maximum period the Appellant agreed to pay a charge.


The Appellant queries the level of the charge. The Operator does not pursue the Parking Charge following a breach of contract. The Parking Charge has been issued pursuant to a specific contractual term and therefore the question of loss is not a relevant consideration for this appeal.


In my view the parking charge is not excessive for two reasons. First, because the amount being sought by the operator was clearly communicated to the appellant by way of the signage on the site. If the Appellant considered the charge to be excessive, the Appellant had the choice to reject it by either not parking or parking in accordance with the terms. Second, the amount being claimed by the Operator is in my view justified given the operator's running costs. It is also in line with industry standards.


For further guidance on this point the Appellant may wish to consider the judgment in PARKINGEYE LIMITED and BARRY BEAVIS [2015] EWCA Civ 402


I note the Appellant’s comments regarding the driver of the vehicle at the time of issue however it is the driver’s responsibility to ensure that the te rms of parking are complied with and whilst sympathizing with the Appellant, 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.




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.


The Operator must now allow you 14 days to make payment before they commence any action to enforce the charge.


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



The following information relates to appeals which were submitted on or after the 1st April 2015:


If you wish to view the evidence that was relied upon by the operator then you may log back into the IAS system and view it, but by doing so you agree to the following terms:


You agree that the operator’s evidence, including any comments, documents or photo’s are made available to you in strict confidence. YOU MUST NOT DUPLICATE, PUBLISH, SHARE OR REPRODUCE THE INFORMATION IN ANY WAY without the prior written permission of the parking operator. Without prejudice to any other right arising from breach of this agreement, you agree to indemnify the parking operator and the Independent Parking Committee Limited in respect of any costs or other expenses howsoever caused for any breach, by you or any others with whom you provide this information, of this confidentiality agreement. You can log in at http://www.theIAS.org by entering your email address and the password that you created when you first registered the appeal.


Yours sincerely

The Independent Appeals Service



Independent Appeals Service

4 The Stables

Red Cow Yard



WA16 6DG


w: http://www.theias.org

e: info@theias.org


The Independent Appeals Service is a trading style of the Independent Parking Committee Limited, Registered address: 4 The Stables Red Cow Yard, Knutsford Cheshire, WA16 6DG. Registered in England and Wales (08248531).


The content of this email transmission and any documents attached to it are confidential and are intended for the named recipient only and may contain information that is subject to legal privilege. If you have received this email in error or are not the named recipient you are expressly forbidden from copying, storing or further distributing the contents of this transmission by any means. Disclosure of the content of this email transmission or its content may amount to contempt of court or a criminal offence. If you have received this email transmission in error you are requested to notify the sender and delete the email and its content forthwith.


The Independent Appeals Service does not accept service of documents by email.



Any advice anybody can provide about how to proceed with this would be appreciated. I have attached my initial appeal to G24 and the one I sent to IAS I also have good photos of the car park etc.


Can anyone advise whether or not credit reports etc can be affected by these fines?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't see who G24 say they are pursuing for this charge?


The IAS adjudicator normally/sometimes(?) States who the PPC is chasing...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can anyone advise whether or not credit reports etc can be affected by these fines?


Highly unlikely. It's not a fine, only a court can levy that. G24 would have to go to court and win, which I don't think the guys here would think is a possibility. Even then, a court would have to find that you owed something and then if you didn't pay it, then it might be a problem for you.



Illegitimi non carborundum




Link to post
Share on other sites
I can't see who G24 say they are pursuing for this charge?


The IAS adjudicator normally/sometimes(?) States who the PPC is chasing...


The original letter from g24 states they are pursuing me the registered keeper. I missed the details of to protect my identity.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The original letter from g24 states they are pursuing me the registered keeper. I missed the details of to protect my identity.




Where in the IAS adjudicators decision does it say that the RK is liable for the charge?



Post up redacted copies of further correspondence received, but I suspect you will now be in the debt collector chain....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well for starters the IAS have got the burden of proof arse about face, it is for the parking co to prove their case so that wont go down well if this is used as evidence of proper procedure. secondly, 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 completelt 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 eithe 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 peopel 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 becuse 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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the photo you have posted of the signage, there is no indication as to how many minutes 'free parking'?


How does the IAS believe that is sufficient to bind any party to a contract?

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.






If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!


Link to post
Share on other sites
The guidance to this appeal makes it clear that I am bound by the law of contract


Which means they can only claim damages and must show in detail how they have suffered loss. If they can do that, they can only claim the amount of the losses and anything extra is a penalty added on so not legal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you bound by the law of contract? As a concept yes but there is no contractual obligation in this case. There can be no claim for damages for breaching a contract that doesnt exist as the signage makes it clear that their claim is for a breach, not a contractual obligation.

That is why we love the IPC they are so stupid they hurt their own members with their "independent" appeals service and help the motorist with their twaddle.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...