Author Topic: Excel Parking Services - Bakers Road  (Read 639 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Oleigh

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 23
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Excel Parking Services - Bakers Road
« Reply #30 on: September 19, 2024, 01:46:40 pm »
Thank you. That is perfectly understood.

b789

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3475
  • Karma: +153/-5
    • View Profile
    • GullibleTree
Re: Excel Parking Services - Bakers Road
« Reply #31 on: September 19, 2024, 03:42:21 pm »
DOn't be surprised if the IAS appeal is unsuccessful. It is not "independent" at all.

If this goes to court, you have a very good prospect of being successful. All those PCNs are "penalties" which are unlawful.
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain

Oleigh

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 23
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Excel Parking Services - Bakers Road
« Reply #32 on: September 19, 2024, 04:53:33 pm »
It makes sense now, there were very quick to refer it to the IAS.

DWMB2

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2501
  • Karma: +72/-1
    • View Profile
Re: Excel Parking Services - Bakers Road
« Reply #33 on: September 19, 2024, 05:04:50 pm »
It makes sense now, there were very quick to refer it to the IAS.
I wouldn't read much into that, they're required to provide you the opportunity to appeal to the IAS when they reject your appeal.

Oleigh

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 23
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Excel Parking Services - Bakers Road
« Reply #34 on: September 19, 2024, 06:54:31 pm »
Ok. Thanks.

Oleigh

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 23
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Excel Parking Services - Bakers Road
« Reply #35 on: September 20, 2024, 09:40:39 pm »
Can I check please, how this works after the IAS potentially reject my appeal.
For anyone that has been through similar.
What do I do after the rejection? Do I just wait on Excel to sue me? Does this charge keep increasing as well?
I’ve read stories of people getting visits from bailiffs to recover accumulating parking fines but I don’t know at what stage this could potentially occur.

DWMB2

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2501
  • Karma: +72/-1
    • View Profile
Re: Excel Parking Services - Bakers Road
« Reply #36 on: September 20, 2024, 10:07:53 pm »
Yes, the ball would essentially be in Excel's court.

Bailiff's won't be coming round. For that to happen you'd have to lose in court and then refuse to pay, at which point Excel would have to apply to enforce the debt

If it does go to court they'll claim the £100, legal fees of around £50, a hearing fee of £35, and interest. They'll add on £70 debt collection fees but these can be successfully challenged. A loss in court is usually around £200. If it gets that far, and if they win.
« Last Edit: September 20, 2024, 10:10:48 pm by DWMB2 »

Oleigh

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 23
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Excel Parking Services - Bakers Road
« Reply #37 on: September 20, 2024, 10:13:00 pm »
Thanks very much .
Could they send me letters for increased charges before they take me to court? If they did, are these enforceable, and do I just ignore until they I receive court letters requesting my statement?
I would just like to know what to expect so I know not to panic when/if that happened.

DWMB2

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2501
  • Karma: +72/-1
    • View Profile
Re: Excel Parking Services - Bakers Road
« Reply #38 on: September 20, 2024, 10:39:42 pm »
Before any court action you'll get a barrage of debt collector letters. File and ignore these. The only way they can seek to enforce the charge is through the courts.

Oleigh

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 23
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Excel Parking Services - Bakers Road
« Reply #39 on: September 20, 2024, 10:46:13 pm »
Thanks for this information.

H C Andersen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2317
  • Karma: +49/-31
    • View Profile
Re: Excel Parking Services - Bakers Road
« Reply #40 on: September 21, 2024, 12:38:48 pm »
IMO, register an appeal with IAS.

I would simplify your approach and couch your argument in exactly the same form as assessors' responses are written.

For example:
Was there a breach of contract which rendered the driver liable for a parking charge?

Before the assessor can assess this question it is necessary to establish the conditions of contract concerned.


The operator seeks to rely upon the Ts and Cs displayed at the site as forming the contract between them and the driver.

I submit that this misrepresents the agreement between them and the driver who was the same on each occasion mentioned below.

The published terms include a general requirement for drivers to pay prior to leaving the site. These signs and terms have been displayed for at least 3 years. When I first used the site I paid prior to leaving, however, on one occasion when I was calculating my likely number of hours and cost and searching for the correct coins I spoke with an attendant who was on site who told me that I could pay on exit if I wished. On that day and every parking day since(I estimate more than 100) I have paid on exit without issue despite this being recorded by the operator's ANPR system.

By accepting payment from me in this manner over such an extended period the creditor has adopted different terms in my case, the alternative that they thought that a breach had occurred on each occasion but that because of a technical hitch or their largesse they chose to not pursue these events as being breaches is simply not tenable.

On *** I received the first on X PCNs alleging a breach of contract, namely not paying before I left the car park.

I challenged each PCN and made the principle of the above legal point. In the operator's responses, although they state that they have 'considered the points raised and have reviewed their records' their subsequent reasoning is flawed. Instead of considering the legal issues of legitimate expectation and condonation they have focused solely on the authority of on-site attendants.

It is not the attendant's conduct which is under scrutiny but the operator's who
does not challenge that over a period in excess of 2 years they accepted payment from me as described i.e. on exit, and therefore are prevented from making unilateral changes to our mutual agreement which is the basis of the PCNs.

I accept that following receipt of their first rejection I was put on notice that payment when parking was required, since when I have complied.

Would be how I would address the assessor's first stop in their thought process, namely the terms of any contract and whether there was a breach which entitled the operator to a parking charge.

Oleigh

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 23
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Excel Parking Services - Bakers Road
« Reply #41 on: September 23, 2024, 09:40:11 am »
Thanks very much for this.
My deadline for responding to the IAS is midnight today.
I will revert with their response/verdit on as this progresses.
Thank you.

Oleigh

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 23
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Excel Parking Services - Bakers Road
« Reply #42 on: October 15, 2024, 09:41:15 pm »
The IAS made a ruling on my appeal and as expected they dismissed my appeal and upheld each of the parking charges.
See below the detailed response for one of them.


The Appellant should understand that the Adjudicator is not in a position to give legal advice to either of the parties, but they are entitled to seek their own independent legal advice. The Adjudicator's role is to consider whether or not the parking charge has a basis in law and was properly issued in the circumstances of each individual case. In all Appeals the Adjudicator is bound by the relevant law applicable at the time and is only able to consider legal challenges and not factual mistakes nor extenuating or mitigating circumstances. Throughout this appeal the Operator has had the opportunity consider all points raised and could have conceded the appeal at any stage. The Adjudicator who deals with this Appeal is legally qualified and each case is dealt with according to their understanding of the law as it applies, and the legal principles involved. A decision by an Adjudicator is not legally binding on an Appellant who is entitled to seek their own legal advice if they so wish.

In all Appeals the burden of proof is the civil one whereby the party asserting a fact or submission has to establish that matter on the balance of probabilities. If the parking operator fails to establish that a Parking Charge Notice was properly issued in accordance with the law, then it is likely that an Appeal will be allowed. If the parking operator does establish that a Parking Charge Notice was properly and legally issued, then the burden shifts to the Appellant to establish that the notice was improperly or unlawfully issued and if the Appellant proves those matters on the balance of probabilities, then it is likely that the Appeal will be allowed. However, the Appeal will be dismissed if the Appellant fails to establish those matters on the balance of probabilities. The responsibility is at all times on the parties to provide the Adjudicator with the evidential basis upon which to make a decision.

The Operator has provided evidence of the signs at the site, which make it clear any driver not paying for the duration of their stay, within five minutes of arriving, will be issued with the parking charge notice.

The Appellant claims that they paid to park and provides evidence to support the claims. The Operator accepts this but shows the payment was delayed. The Appellant acknowledges this was delayed and gives an explanation. However, there is no evidence for this. As explained above, at this stage, the onus is on the Appellant to satisfy me the charge is unlawful. In the absence of any evidence, I am not satisfied.

The explanation is that they were advised by the "onsite attendants" that they may pay on leaving the site. There are no details as to whom they spoke, what their role was, and when the advice was given. For example they have been attending the site for three years. The terms may have changed more than once in that time. Although additional notice should be given for a change of terms, it is incumbent on the driver to check the terms each time they park.

This is an ANPR car park, so it will not be 'manned' in the traditional sense. However, the Operator does confirm attendants are sometimes on site. If the advice came from a attendant and was near in time this would be advice the Appellant could expect to rely on.

The attendant would be the agent of the Operator and able to vary the contract, but there is no evidence for this, and it would be unusual. Attendants are trained to refer drivers to the signs for advice. This is the role of the sign, and the attendant is there to enforce. This ensures all receive the same advice. There is also no evidence of payments being made in this way for three years. Even if I accept this, I revert to the earlier point that the terms of the car park can change and the driver must check for this, although there must also be clear notice of the change.

The signs offer the terms for parking. By remaining parked on land managed by the Operator, having had notice of the terms, the driver agrees to them. There is no evidence the notice was insufficient. In consideration for parking they agree to pay the tariff within five minutes or pay the charge. In this way they have entered into a contract with the Operator and agreed to be bound by the advertised terms.

The only way to vary the contract is by agreement between the parties. Any advice or permission given by another, not a party to the contract, is irrelevant. If the Appellant received erroneous advice from another, they have my sympathy, but this is an issue between the Appellant and their advisor and has no bearing on the lawfulness of the charge.

The driver is entitled to a reasonable time to read the terms and comply with the requirements. It would clearly be unfair to issue a charge on arrival before the driver had a chance to pay. However, this must be done immediately. It is not for the driver to decide when they will read the signs and pay.

Here the Operator has made it a term of the contract that payment must be made within five minutes. I have seen nothing to show this is unreasonable and that further time should be allowed. If it became apparent to the driver that they may not be able to comply within the required time, I am satisfied it was made clear they ought to leave; otherwise by remaining they would agree to pay the charge.

I appreciate the Appellant has paid for the time they used, and they have my sympathy, but the guidance to the appeal is clear that I may only consider legal issues not extenuating circumstances. The Operator has this discretion, but they are unlikely to exercise it in the Appellant's favour, in the absence of evidence to support the claim.

The Operator has provided photographic evidence of the Appellant's vehicle leaving the land they manage, five hours and twenty minutes after it arrived, and without a payment until five minutes before leaving. The appeal is dismissed.

Oleigh

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 23
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Excel Parking Services - Bakers Road
« Reply #43 on: October 15, 2024, 09:44:05 pm »
This dismissal was made today, I guess I have to wait on Excel to reach out to me, and send a barrage of letters!
« Last Edit: October 15, 2024, 09:52:08 pm by Oleigh »

b789

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3475
  • Karma: +153/-5
    • View Profile
    • GullibleTree
Re: Excel Parking Services - Bakers Road
« Reply #44 on: October 16, 2024, 12:47:35 am »
Of course an IAS appeal was futile and a waste of your time. An anonymous assessor who we have no idea of what, if any, legal training they have received is “sympathetic”. Give us a break. Utter testicles.

Now you wait and weather the useless Debt Recovery Agent (DRA) letters which you can safely ignore. Come back if/when you receive a Letter of Claim (LoC) or an actual claim from the CNBC.

We don’t need to know about the DRA letters.
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain