Another APCOA thread

HO87

The OP didn't specify but it is somewhat irrelevant. In any event if the invoice matches those currently being spilled out by APCOA from Luton then the only detail given is the registration number. A sample of APCOA's Luton invoices can be seen here - as shown in this thread from PePiPoo.

AIUI the car parks/approaches at Luton Airport are covered by ANPR and all that APCOA will be inputting is a series of registration numbers and processing them from there. I'd wager that no comparison is made between the descriptions thrown up from the DVLA "electronic link" and the stills captured on the cameras. Hence the problem.

This is what makes a nonsense of the whole "electronic link" set-up. Prior to BPA AOS members gaining EL access each application had to be submitted individually using form V888. This required that not only registration numbers were supplied but the description of the vehicle as well and was subject to a minimum standard of "reasonable cause" published by the DVLA (Downloads as a PDF). This same standard cannot apply to EL access and although the DVLA state that use of the EL is subject to audit they have also admitted that they have no staff to conduct the audits.

esmerobbo

HO87 wrote: »

The OP didn't specify but it is somewhat irrelevant. In any event if the invoice matches those currently being spilled out by APCOA from Luton then the only detail given is the registration number. A sample of APCOA's Luton invoices can be seen here - as shown in this thread from PePiPoo.

AIUI the car parks/approaches at Luton Airport are covered by ANPR and all that APCOA will be inputting is a series of registration numbers and processing them from there. I'd wager that no comparison is made between the descriptions thrown up from the DVLA "electronic link" and the stills captured on the cameras. Hence the problem.

This is what makes a nonsense of the whole "electronic link" set-up. Prior to BPA AOS members gaining EL access each application had to be submitted individually using form V888. This required that not only registration numbers were supplied but the description of the vehicle as well and was subject to a minimum standard of "reasonable cause" published by the DVLA (Downloads as a PDF). This same standard cannot apply to EL access and although the DVLA state that use of the EL is subject to audit they have also admitted that they have no staff to conduct the audits.

That was my thinking behind the question, the reg No could be misread so just generating the RK requests by the reg number alone. As on the written application V888 form it requests the make model and colour?
As you say its difficult then to justify the reasonable cause if the OPs daughters vehicle or God knows how many more have not even been in the same county!

socks_uk

esmerobbo wrote: »

Forgive me if I missed it, but did the letter just quote the reg number or did it quote the vehicle make?

No, just reg number. The more we read up on this the less freaked out we are about it!

HO87

esmerobbo wrote: »

That was my thinking behind the question, the reg No could be misread so just generating the RK requests by the reg number alone. As on the written application V888 form it requests the make model and colour?
As you say its difficult then to justify the reasonable cause if the OPs daughters vehicle or God knows how many more have not even been in the same county!

Exactly. It makes a complete mockery of the DVLA's repeated public assurances that their disclosure of RK details is subject to minimum "reasonable cause" criteria; is audited and is governed by the ATA agreement with the BPA. The truth is that once an AOS member gets hold of the EL reasonable cause disappears like smoke on the wind.

esmerobbo

HO87 wrote: »

Exactly. It makes a complete mockery of the DVLA's repeated public assurances that their disclosure of RK details is subject to minimum "reasonable cause" criteria; is audited and is governed by the ATA agreement with the BPA. The truth is that if once an AOS member gets hold of the EL reasonable cause disappears like smoke on the wind.

I wonder what details they have to give to gain information though the electronic link? surely it cant just be the VRM.

ppc_guy

I think EVERY SINGLE ONE of you is missing the point here. The Op knows to ignore the ppc (as advised by you people) but he is concenred as to the possibility of another vehicle using his daughters plates. He is simply requesting the photo to see if it is a misread or if indded the car has been cloned he has no intention of paying the PPC ticket but is more concerned for his duaghters car to prevent any furhter hasle...

MY advise would be to return to the police and give them the reference number and clarify your concerns to them explain you are not wantign to appeal the PPC ticket but ifact are worried about the car being cloned. They then have a duty to investigate.

Messrs_Arthur_and_Terry

I would guess the police have witnessed so many of the guilty, protest their innocence, they view these instances as frivolous and mischievous.

The OP might find his daughter has not been quite the saint he thinks she is?

Driver8

Messrs_Arthur_and_Terry wrote: »

I would guess the police have witnessed so many of the guilty, protest their innocence, they view these instances as frivolous and mischievous.

The OP might find his daughter has not been quite the saint he thinks she is?

Perky, why don't you go and crayon all over someone else's thread?

You must be losing money again this week when a lot more people are taking no notice whatsoever of your scams. Tough.

That's why you keep coming on here trying to defend your indefensible scams and basically talking a load of crap. You don't fool people on here you know. Your's and other scam empires are
slowly, unfortunately not faster, collapsing around your ears and you don't like it one bit. Tough.

Run along now.

Messrs_Arthur_and_Terry

Driver8 wrote: »

Perky, why don't you go and crayon all over someone else's thread?

You must be losing money again this week when a lot more people are taking no notice whatsoever of your scams. Tough.

That's why you keep coming on here trying to defend your indefensible scams and basically talking a load of crap. You don't fool people on here you know. Your's and other scam empires are
slowly, unfortunately not faster, collapsing around your ears and you don't like it one bit. Tough.

Run along now.

C'mon D8, you're just jealous of success.

Driver8

Messrs_Arthur_and_Terry wrote: »

C'mon D8, you're just jealous of success.

Jealous of success?

So called success built on lie's, intimidation, demanding money more or less with menace's a scam pure and simple. Is that success?

if trawling dating site's is success, well ! :rotfl:

You know nothing about me or how successful i am. At least i can sleep at night and not worry how a scam operation is coming to an end.