A recent judgment shows that the assessors the Independent Parking Committee are using fail to have a basic grasp of English.
The sign shows the conditions of parking. One of these is that pre-authorised vehicles are allowed to park.
Here is the assessors decision:
There is no dispute that the Appellant holds the licence agreement and is authorised to use the parking space in question. However the Parking Charge Notice was issued because the vehicle was not clearly displaying a valid parking permit. Therefore any points raised as to whether the Appellant was an ‘authorised’ user are irrelevant.Obviously, serious doubts as to the assessors competency arise if the assessor does not know the meaning of the common English word 'or'.
Just to make it clear to the assessor, here is the wording of the sign he should have considered.
This clearly states that authorised users can park, and that there is no requirement to display a ticket.
The POPLA IAS board recently highlighted the dangers of a 'race-to the bottom' if operators are allowed to choose to use competing appeals service.
In The Prankster's opinion, decisions of this quality highlight the fact the the appeals service offered by the IPC is not fit for purpose and should be replaced as soon as possible. The Prankster hopes that the 'barrister' the IPC used for this appeal is quietly retired and replaced by one who understands English.
The Parking Prankster