Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • 1505grandad
    • By 1505grandad 28th Jun 15, 10:05 AM
    • 46Posts
    • 89Thanks
    1505grandad
    UKPC - Aylesbury Shopping Centre
    • #1
    • 28th Jun 15, 10:05 AM
    UKPC - Aylesbury Shopping Centre 28th Jun 15 at 10:05 AM
    I am dealing with daughter's spec.invoice from UKPC - window ticket on 30/1/15.

    NTK received and on 17/3/15 usual appeal from Newbies sticky sent to UKPC.

    Rejected. Appeal to POPLA sent 20/5/2015 with usual points - GPEOL, landowner contract, unlawful penalty charge, non-compliant NTK and signage. Many thanks to all the posters on MSE & Peppipoo for all the information I used to prepare the appeals etc.

    POPLA acknowledged stating adjudication due 24/6/2015.

    No evidence pack received by 24/6 - emailed POPLA who replied 25/6 with attached evidence submitted by UKPC on 17/6. Asked for 7 day stay of adjudication. (Auto-response to the email request received but no actual email from POPLA - but assume that stay has been logged).

    I have prepared a rebuttal of UKPCs evidence pack, posted below (UKPC evidence did not refer to the GPEOL appeal point but included a lengthy spiel re Beavis case).

    I notice that a recent post on Peppipoo dated 16/6 by GIBZY advising win at POPLA for same site as my daughter's against UKPC, but no actual rebuttal was posted.

    I will be most grateful if anybody can let me know if this is ok and there are no obvious errors or omissions.



    Verification code:

    In response to the evidence pack that UK Parking Control Ltd. have submitted:-


    UKPC have not addressed point No. 2 in my appeal re:


    CONTRACT WITH THE LANDOWNER — NOT COMPLIANT WITH THE BPA CODE OF PRACTICE AND NO LEGAL STATUS TO OFFER PARKING OR ENFORCE CHARGES

    as no copy of the contract with the landowner has been submitted with their evidence.

    I contend that UKPC have not disproved point No.4 in my appeal re:

    NOTICE TO KEEPER NOT COMPLIANT WITH THE POFA 2012


    UKPC state that they have clearly identified that they are the creditor in their correspondence with me. However, as can be seen from the evidence they have provided, none of this correspondence clearly states the name of the creditor and, as such, it seems that one must be expected to infer that UKPC is indeed the creditor. Merely implying that UKPC is the creditor does not meet the requirements of PoFA 2012.

    Additionally, UKPC state that "by stating the date and time of charge issuance on our notices, we are specifying the period of parking to which the notice relates – the relevant period of parking is that into which the stated date and time falls." A period of time has both a start and an end and without one or the other is, by definition, not a period. UKPC have failed to mention at least one of these on their Notice to Keeper. The period into which a point in time falls is a meaningless statement – this could in fact be any period of time. UKPC’s example of a motorist who has parked several times on site demonstrates the importance of explicitly specifying a period.

    Therefore UKPC have not met the keeper liability requirements and, as a result, keeper liability does not apply.





    Beavis Case

    UKPC claim in their evidence pack that the recent Parking Eye v Beavis case heard at the Court of Appeal gives justification to their claim.




    I contend that there are few similarities.

    Mr Beavis overstayed the free parking allowed, where no facility existed to purchase extra time, whereas the driver of my vehicle left the car park within the two hour free parking allowed. UKPC have produced no evidence to the contrary.

    Parking Eye were making payments to that landowner for a parking management concession conferring what might be considered as landowner rights. It was argued by Parking Eye that it was necessary for them to recover these sums by the issuing of parking charge notices.
    I contend that, unless a similar contract is in place with this landowner, there can be no argument in this case of commercial justification as no loss to them was involved.

    As the penalties imposed in the local authority car parks are £50 and this is reduced even after appeal by 50%.
    Therefore I contend that the charge imposed by UKPC is indeed extravagant.

    Finally I would state that the Beavis case is still subject to appeal and until this matter is finally resolved any claims by UKPC are spurious.

    I presume that the mention of the Beavis case in their evidence pack is in response to my appeal point No.1:-


    NO GENUINE PRE-ESTIMATE OF LOSS

    UKPC have therefore failed to provide an un-redacted breakdown of the Genuine Pre-Estimate of Loss (GPEOL) as requested in my appeal.

    With regard to my appeal point No. 3:-

    UNLAWFUL PENALTY CHARGE

    UKPC has not explicitly addressed this point from my appeal and has, therefore, not denied that they generate revenues from parking notices alone. I would re-state that this, therefore, is not a loss, rather a revenue source for them. Hence, it is against the principles of parking charges and should be quashed.

    With regard to my appeal point No.5:-



    UNCLEAR, INADEQUATE AND NON-COMPLIANT SIGNAGE


    some of the photos in the evidence pack are date stamped 2012 and are therefore not pertinent to the actual time of the incident. I do not accept that UKPC have proved conclusively that the signs were seen and understood by the driver, and therefore did not enter into any contract with UKPC.

     

    Yours faithfully,

Page 3
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 19th Sep 16, 8:01 PM
    • 4,110 Posts
    • 4,716 Thanks
    beamerguy
    Good on you 1505grandad

    As the days go by and the problems get more serious, it's now well over the heads of the DVLA and indeed Morley

    If Mr Morley really wanted to, he could talk to government to make changes. But whilst the DVLA collects £££millions each year he runs with the scam. How much by depends on if a wise newspaper decides to dig deep to discover the real facts.

    Maybe a whistleblower from the DVLA could come forward, the media will adore you and you will be anonymous and you might just explode the scam of the decade.
    You never know they might pay you a nice sum of money, that must be worth thinking about and be anonymous as well
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • 1505grandad
    • By 1505grandad 25th Sep 16, 7:20 PM
    • 46 Posts
    • 89 Thanks
    1505grandad
    Received reply as follows sent by someone from complaints team even though I sent it to chief.executive@dvla.gsi.gov.uk:-



    Thank you for your email of 31 August, about the release of information to UK Parking Control (UKPC) Ltd, following an Information Commissioners Office (ICO) Review.

    I have reviewed your case and can confirm that there is nothing further the DVLA can advise you, other than what was provided in our letter of 9 August.

    Our letter of 9 August advised that a full consideration of the points you had made, was undertaken. It is considered that following the ICOs review and subsequent recommendations, the DVLA will not take any action, such as those you have suggested. Recommendations made by the ICO and to be undertaken by UKPC will look to address the concerns you have.

    As advised, should your Daughter wish for no information to be provided to third parties, she will need to follow the steps detailed in our letter of 9 August.

    I trust this clarifies matters.
     
    Yours sincerely
    Joseph Cooper
    DVLA Complaints Team
    Find out about DVLA’s online services
    Visit: www.gov.uk/dvla
     
     
    Don't think I will bother to continue with the DVLA complaints review but will send my emails and
    • 1505grandad
    • By 1505grandad 25th Sep 16, 7:29 PM
    • 46 Posts
    • 89 Thanks
    1505grandad
    I am trying to post my proposed reply to the DVLA but keep getting message:-


    Unable to post your message. Please try again.

    This happened to a very long post I tried a couple of weeks ago which resulted in my IP address being banned.


    Any thoughts what is happening?
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 25th Sep 16, 7:41 PM
    • 4,110 Posts
    • 4,716 Thanks
    beamerguy
    I am trying to post my proposed reply to the DVLA but keep getting message:-


    Unable to post your message. Please try again.

    This happened to a very long post I tried a couple of weeks ago which resulted in my IP address being banned.


    Any thoughts what is happening?
    Originally posted by 1505grandad
    Why do you think your IP address is banned ? by whom ?
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • bod1467
    • By bod1467 25th Sep 16, 8:15 PM
    • 14,806 Posts
    • 13,448 Thanks
    bod1467
    If it is really long, try splitting it over two posts?

    Perhaps the structure of some of the content is not allowed by the forum software? (e.g. it doesn't tend to like system 32 without the space).
    • 1505grandad
    • By 1505grandad 2nd Oct 16, 8:06 PM
    • 46 Posts
    • 89 Thanks
    1505grandad
    As I have been re-instated for access to the forum only a few days ago I am reluctant to post again in case, for the third time, I receive the dreaded notice:-


    Sorry. The Administrator has banned your IP address.


    However, I will attempt to post my proposed response to the last DVLA fob off email (#42). Any comments/add to/amendments will be most appreciated:-


    FOR THE ATTENTION OF MR OLIVER MORLEY - CEO OF DVLA
    I have received a reply in response to my complaint email dated 31st August which, I thought, was going to the Chief Executives Office (stage 2), but the reply seems to have been sent from the complaints team (stage 1).


    I am of course shocked by the negative contents of the reply but I do thank the DVLA for confirming, by not rebutting or finding any flaws in my reasoning, that you accept and agree that UKPC have indeed breached the KADOE contract.


    So to summarise:-


    1) UKPC have used data obtained from the DVLA, for one event only, to inform a third party about another entirely different event, even though UKPC had no details of registered keeper at the time of the different event.


    2) The ICO have confirmed that UKPC have breached THREE Principles of the DPA


    3) UKPC have breached the BPA CoP by breaching the DPA which attracts a (classed as serious) LEVEL 5 AOS CoP sanction (there are only SIX levels!!)


    It is reasonable to asume that any one of the above breaches of the KADOE contract would have incurred some sort of sanction, but taking no action of any kind when ALL THREE of the above mentioned breaches have ocurred is disrespectful and insulting to the motoring public.


    The general public might wonder why the DVLA, an agency of the Government, would rather continue to provide the personal data of millions of motorists, a large proportion of whom have voted for the said Government, to an entity that admits to fraudulent activities and has previously been banned by the DVLA. As well as committing the above breaches, which you accept have taken place.


    It is evident from postings on the internet that UKPC have recently been making an increasing number of proposed court cases against motorists for an alleged private parking invoice.


    Also on the internet there have been reports of CCJ's obtained against motorists, by private parking companies, when the motorist has not responded to court papers, because they have moved house (i.e. not received the court papers and knew nothing about the court case).


    In fact, it is reported that Teresa May, the Prime Minister, and Sir Oliver Heald, Courts Minister, are not happy with this situation.


    So it is appalling that the DVLA seem to be aiding and abetting these unethical companies by not taking any action against one of these companies that has so obviously breached all sorts of rules and regulations.


    The more cynical amongst the general public might conclude that the DVLA is only interested in maintaining the current £10million income received by revealing personal data, to the detriment of the motorist.


    I am sure that this could not possibly be the case.


    You may or may not wish to respond to this email. Either way I will be sending these recent emails and the replies from the DVLA to my MP, and other Government departments/officials within the next 14 days. I will also be sending letters to Teresa May and Sir Oliver Heald expressing my disappointment at the unfairness of the DVLA.


    Kind regards,
    1505grandad
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 2nd Oct 16, 9:03 PM
    • 4,110 Posts
    • 4,716 Thanks
    beamerguy
    As I have been re-instated for access to the forum only a few days ago I am reluctant to post again in case, for the third time, I receive the dreaded notice:-

    Sorry. The Administrator has banned your IP address.
    Originally posted by 1505grandad
    I had the same last year, there was no reason, used CCleaner, which is free .. search on google.
    Cleared all cookies and cache, re--booted and problem solved.
    The problem with ISP banning is that ISP numbers run in blocks so it's probably nothing to do with you.

    I can see nothing in your posts that would give you an IP ban.
    You are not alone
    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=3205650

    Back to business .... Doubt if Morley of the DVLA can give you a better answer because he does not know the answer ?
    Best to contact Theresa May with a copy asking what is the problem
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • 1505grandad
    • By 1505grandad 17th Oct 16, 8:46 PM
    • 46 Posts
    • 89 Thanks
    1505grandad
    Received the following email from DVLA in response to my email in my previous post:-


    This message was sent with high importance.

    Dear xxxxxxxxxx

    We hope to respond fully to complaints within 10 working days. However, as this case is quite complex, in order to fully address the issues you have raised, it has been necessary to contact
    other colleagues within the DVLA and they are currently investigating the matter.


    Please be assured that we are working as quickly as possible to resolve this issue for you. We will send you either a full response or a further update within 5 working days.


    Yours sincerely

    Mr Paul Timms
    DVLA Complaints Team



    Not sure what the significance is of the statement "sent with high importance" at the beginning of their email. Nor "the case is quite complex". The DVLA have never taken much notice of any of my previous correspondence which basically said the same as in my last email they are now replying to.


    Surely it is a coincidence that a week ago (too soon?) I sent letters (in A4 envelopes) in my daughter's name, as per the forum campaign, to :-


    Theresa May, my MP, Jeremy Corbyn, Sajid Javid (Secretary of State - DCLG), and, with a covering letter in my name, to Chris Grayling (Secretary of State - Transport).


    With thanks to Carthesis I used his version of the BMPA letter because a paragraph concerning the DVLA was included. I added the following after the DVLA paragraph:-


    I attach recent correspondence with the DVLA where my father proved conclusively that a PPC, UK Parking Control Ltd. (UKPC), have breached the following:-

    1) DVLA KADOE Contract
    2) Data Protection Act
    3) BPA Code of Practice


    Yet as you can see from the DVLA replies, they refuse to take any action whatsoever against UKPC for these very serious breaches.

    BUT THE DVLA ARE MORE THAN WILLING TO DIVULGE MINE AND EVERY OTHER
    MOTORIST'S REGISTERED KEEPER DETAILS SO THAT THE PPC CAN CHARGE US UP TO £100 FOR A VERY MINOR ERROR, MADE BY THE DRIVER AT THE TIME, WHILE PARKING AT THE INVITE OF THE LANDOWNER."


    I headed the letters in C-Ms words:-


    WHY DOES YOUR GOVERNMENT ALLOW THIS SCAM


    The reason I sent a letter Chris Grayling is because my daughter's husband appeared with Chris Grayling, in his previous Minister's job, in several local and national tv news broadcasts. He also spoke at a recent Conference while on-stage with Chris Grayling. Every little helps?


    Look forward to the next DVLA fob off.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 17th Oct 16, 8:52 PM
    • 40,355 Posts
    • 52,228 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Surely it is a coincidence that a week ago (too soon?) I sent letters (in A4 envelopes) in my daughter's name, as per the forum campaign
    LOL...surely a coincidence!!

    Nice one! Popcorn time, as we say - keep us updated!
    PRIVATE PCN in England/Wales? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT

    Click on the breadcrumb trail, top of page: Household & Travel > Motoring > Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking & READ THE 'NEWBIES' FAQS THREAD.
    DON'T read old advice to ignore, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • 1505grandad
    • By 1505grandad 2nd Nov 16, 9:32 PM
    • 46 Posts
    • 89 Thanks
    1505grandad
    Sincere apologies - it seems that I have failed even more dismally than I predicted at the end of my last post.


    Despite tweaking my underwhelming expectations by stating phrases such as "high importance" and "the case is quite complex" all the DVLA can come up with, in answer to my quite clearly proven serious breaches by UKPC, is the following stupid meaningless reply:-

    Thank you for your e-mail of 3 October to our Chief Executive, Mr Oliver Morley, about the release of information by the Agency. Mr Morley has asked me to reply on his behalf.

    As a full explanation has been given, there is nothing more that I can do to help you further.
    I now consider that it is time to draw your case, and correspondence on it, to a close. We will, of course, consider with care any further correspondence you may send us about your complaint, but if we conclude that it does not raise any new issues of substance we may only acknowledge it.


    Should your Daughter wish to place a suppression marker on her driver/vehicle record please ensure she follows the steps previously described and the Agency will consider her case.
    I trust this explains matters for you.

    In other words, "go away little plebs, we can't be bothered to justify our non-actions to the likes of you".


    Wonder what possible further information can be sent to them that would allow the DVLA to be fair to the tens of millions of cash cow motorists.

    My understanding is that the DVLA defend revealing our personal data by making sure that the PPC adheres to various rules and regulations.


    As I have proved conclusively to the DVLA that UKPC have breached laws, CoP and contract stipulations, I must draw my own conclusions as to why the DVLA are so keen to appease their benefactor PPC's.


    The motoring population have therefore been duped by the Defender Of Our PErsonal Data (DOOPED - rhymes with stupid).


    I was hoping that after judiciously reading the letters I sent to our fearless elected leaders that some replies might have been received by now, to see if it would be any use sending to them the latest drivel from the DVLA. Not holding my breath.


    On second thoughts, perhaps it would be more appropriate if the first word of the above acronym was Protector, because I certainly feel that my daughter and I have been well and truly shat upon.


    Still smiling though.


    Especially after an uplifting appointment today enabling me to look forward, positively, so that hopefully in a few weeks time I will be able to devote more time to continue with Aviva's
    (the landholder) invitation to "bring it on". This will include a claim against them/UKPC for DPA breaches, as confirmed by the ICO, their defamation regarding my daughter, and
    my considerable time spent appealing, researching, jumping through all the hoops required, and trying to make them understand what has been a complete farce.


    When I am ready, perhaps it will be OK if I can pick the brains of the forum as to the best way to achieve this?.

    Once again, apologies for not getting anywhere with the disputed DOOPED (rhymes with ................).
    • TDA
    • By TDA 3rd Nov 16, 12:49 PM
    • 245 Posts
    • 167 Thanks
    TDA
    I hope your daughter shares your enthusiasm for this. She is the one who would have to make the claim.
    • 1505grandad
    • By 1505grandad 30th Nov 16, 10:02 PM
    • 46 Posts
    • 89 Thanks
    1505grandad
    @TDA - YOU BET!!


    Update re campaign letters.

    1) Letter from 10 Downing St thanking us for contacting PM. TM very much appreciates time taken to write to her. Have forwarded our letter to Dept of Transport and DCLG who have responsibility for matters raised - they will reply directly to us.


    2) Letter from MP thanking us etc. Has offered to help by getting in touch with the two Accredited Trade Associations, are we happy to do this on our behalf?.


    3) I previously sent an email to MP attaching the email chain I have had with DVLA, which included the last two replies from DVLA. I emphasised how UKPC have breached DPA, BPA CoP & KADOE contract and that no action/sanction has been undertaken by DVLA against them. Basically requested MP assist by contacting Mr Oliver Morley, CEO of the DVLA, to explain why he finds the situation acceptable.
    Also can he expand on the statement in DVLA email reply dated 17/10/2016:-


    "We will, of course, consider with care any further correspondence you may send us about your complaint"


    in that I cannot see anything more serious than the breaches I have already proved have occurred - can he suggest other occurrences that would matter to the DVLA?

    Emphasised that complaint is why no action taken re proven serious breaches not disputed by DVLA.


    MP replied:-


    Thank you for your email and the detailed attachments. I was sorry to read of the problems you and your daughter have faced when dealing with the DVLA.

    I can certainly raise this matter with the DVLA. In order for me to do so, I would be grateful if you could confirm your address and your daughter’s address.


    I replied thanking MP for willing to help with obtaining sensible answers from DVLA & BPA, and hopefully will not accept the inevitable fob-offs from these entities. Also warned MP about the emails from BPA in posts #34 & #35. Hope no objection from C-M that I quoted verbatim her post #36 which I informed MP summed up the situation precisely.


    Respect that my MP suggested contacting the ATA's off own bat and seems keen to help.


    Whether anything other than fob-off responses will be received from the DVLA or BPA et al remains to be seen. However, remaining positive.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 1st Dec 16, 1:13 AM
    • 40,355 Posts
    • 52,228 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Hope no objection from C-M that I quoted verbatim her post #36 which I informed MP summed up the situation precisely.
    no probs!

    PRIVATE PCN in England/Wales? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT

    Click on the breadcrumb trail, top of page: Household & Travel > Motoring > Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking & READ THE 'NEWBIES' FAQS THREAD.
    DON'T read old advice to ignore, unless in Scotland/NI.

Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

2,948Posts Today

6,222Users online

Martin's Twitter