The BPA have complained to Marcus Jones that their rivals, the IPC do not have to operate under the scrutiny of an independent board. As the government have done nothing, the BPA have taken unilateral action to level the playing field by ceasing to fund ISPA.
The Prankster agrees the situation was unfair. The current situation creates an imbalance. As the IPC do not have to fund an independent panel, they can charge their members less, thus allowing them to undercut the BPA.
The IPC are also free to operate their appeals system as a kangaroo court, staffed by apparently incompetent and biased assessors. This means that they can decide all appeals on behalf of the operator, thus further attracting members from the BPA.
The IPC appeals system funnels motorist failed appeals to Gladstones Solicitors, who then file a claim. Gladstones are owned by Will Hurley and John Davies, the same two people who own and run the IPC and IAS. Gladstones then take these motorists to court. There is now an overwhelming body of evidence that judges disagree with the bogus reasoning of the 'baristas' who work for the IAS, and that cases are being thrown out by the bucketload.
There is therefore a clear conflict of interest in that the IPC is run by two discredited solicitors who have no idea of the correct legal issues surrounding parking. Gladstones in all known cases fail to obey practice directions and regularly ignore court deadlines, file incorrect evidence, discontinue at the last minute and generally act in a way which appears to bring the legal position into disrepute.
The IAS also fails to meet the statutory requirements for ADR Entities in a significant number of ways, and it is not clear why the government have not removed their qualification to operate.
The Prankster hopes the government will now take action and appoint a scrutiny panel to oversee both appeals services, as well as removing ADR Entity status from the IAS until it meets statutory requirements.
Happy Parking
The Parking Prankster
I think you should enter your whole 'campaign' into the Private Eye Paul Foot award for investigative journalism (which includes websites), you deserve consideration IMHO: http://www.private-eye.co.uk/paul-foot-award
ReplyDeletes/legal position/legal profession.
ReplyDeleteI use "profession" in the loosest sense of receiving money for... whatever it is that they do.
Hurley and Davis must be raking it in by running their own parking equivalent of 'canned hunting'.
ReplyDeleteOwn the ATA
Own the IAS
Own Gladstones
My guess is most people who get a court claim simply pay up in fear, imagine if you are a single pensioner with no rellies to help, you surrender and write a cheque to the hyenas.
HOWEVER, if the brave band of bros. at the BMPA can start making DPA claims stick, things may change. What is needed is a case which is heard by a circuit judge with both parties repped. This would provide a persuasive judgement and level of damages, I think £250 is a bit low
Not often you could say that maybe the BPA has, for once, done a favour here.
ReplyDeleteMaybe the organisation formerly known as the ISPA could use its combnined intellect & experience start a fixed fee no risk appeals service
ReplyDeleteseveral ISPA committee members are also in the BPA board
DeleteOnly one is. The other three have never been members of the BPA board. See http://ispa.co.uk/board where you can click through to pen porraits.
DeleteWhile I agree that the situation was unfair and that BPA's action "levels the playing field", presumably they were complaining to Marcus Jones because they are in fact required to operate under the scrutiny of an independent board. Assuming that this is the case, are BPA jeapordising their own ATA status by shutting down the only board which can properly scrutinise them?
ReplyDeleteI recently appealed a ticket on several points that PCN did not meet, including a fundamental point that NTO was not send within 56 days, as backed up by a copy of capatial to coast parking management, also signage is dated and owned by the church and states vehicles will be clamped also the car park is a building site at the moment. They also may unprofessional remarks about the driver in their parking log system and still the IAS sided with the operation, they are a scam and government need to remove whatever licence they have.
ReplyDelete