The BPA Don't Read Emails

trisontana

I am still waiting for the BPA to respond to my further complaint about T&C regarding the ""Warning it is an offence for any person other than the driver to remove this notice" wording on their ticket envelopes.

trisontana

I was walking through a car park in Lincoln today which was patrolled by Town and City. The signage there had the magic words "Parking Offence Notice". Is that worth another complaint to the BPA?

Coblcris

I would think so. They have applied their rules to this before so the BPA has no good reason not to repeat their actions.

Perhaps an additional point as to further sanctions as T&C obviously did not correct their signs nation wide and so have deliberately flouted the BPA's rules and have effectively ignored the sanction.
If the BPA wishes to be taken seriously as an Accredited Trade Association then they must act consistently and and with sufficient vigour to control errant members.

If the BPA then fails to make T&C correct their signage nationwide then proceed to the DVLA and the ATA issues raised by the BPA's double standards.

Kite2010

Coblcris wrote: »

I would think so. They have applied their rules to this before so the BPA has no good reason not to repeat their actions.

Perhaps an additional point as to further sanctions as T&C obviously did not correct their signs nation wide and so have deliberately flouted the BPA's rules and have effectively ignored the sanction.
If the BPA wishes to be taken seriously as an Accredited Trade Association then they must act consistently and and with sufficient vigour to control errant members.

If the BPA then fails to make T&C correct their signage nationwide then proceed to the DVLA and the ATA issues raised by the BPA's double standards.

What the BPA kicking out a member? :rotfl:

Is that a pig flying past my window?

trisontana

I have now received a reply from the BPA regarding my complaint of the the "warning" notice on TCP tickets. This is their reply:-

If an operator issues a PCN to a vehicle the PCN is the property of the operator and the driver of the vehicle. Any person removing the notice without permission is in fact committing an act of theft, an offence, because it is the unauthorised removal of private property. Whether it is a parking ticket, a flyer or any other item it is still an act of theft. The PCN does not mention that an offence has been committed by the act of parking, in breach of the terms and conditions of parking, only that it is an offence for any authorised person to remove it from the vehicle. That offence would be theft because the PCN doesn’t belong to anyone other than the operator and the driver of the vehicle.

And this is my reply to them:-


Thank you for reply which raises some interesting legal points. You say that an act of theft occurs when somebody apart from the operator or driver removes the ticket. What if a passenger or the registered keeper (who may not be the driver) removes the ticket, is that theft? As you know, theft is defined as the "act of permanently depriving an owner of their property". So if some third party removes the notice and posts it back to the operator would that be considered as theft?

It would be interesting to know how many people have been prosecuted for this "crime". Have you any figures on that?

I would have been refreshing for you or TCP to have admitted that this wording is nothing to do with theft, but all to do with making the ticket look official and to mimic council tickets, just as the carefully chosen initials PCN and the chequered borders on the tickets are similarly used.

No wonder so many people hold the private parking "industry" in such contempt.

I welcome your comments on this

ripped_off_driver

Total rubbish as usual from the BPA. Who is the owner for this crime? It is an unsolicited piece of paper, the equivalent of a flyer. I cannot see how the removal of an unsolicited flyer from a windscreen would or ever could amount to theft. I suspect the BPA is well aware of this.

The fact is that the language is a clear attempt to mimic local authority tickets where it is a statutory offence to remove. Just another attempt by PPCs to con the general public that their tickets have official validity. In fact I would be surprised if the use of this language in these circumstances is not in itself an offence (breach of CPUTR 2008). Instead of justifying this the BPA should be advising their members to refrain from the practice but as a regulator we know that they are about as much use as a chocolate fireguard.

trisontana

According to their twisted logic, even removing an advertising flyer from somebody else's car is classed as theft. I should like to see that go to court!

esmerobbo

As said we know the reason, so as to look like an official PCN.

Once its placed on the car who does it belong to? The PPC have given it away, the driver doesn't want it! Their not likely to complain if somebody wants it!:cool:

Ms_T_2

trisontana wrote: »

That won't get them anywhere. I don't have a PPC "ticket", I am just complaining about their signs.

I have filled in their for stating that I was the regitered keeper and that I purchased my pay and display just after I took my son to the toilet who has spd a symptom which causes distress very easily in unexpected circumstances. We ran in ASDA to the toilet then purchased a parking ticket, the ticket was issued after I had displayed it, so I have receipt of this and have told them I will take it further and go to the press watchdog ect with it.
Due to the fact of being parked up for 15mins before getting a ticket, does this mean they have a hold over me in anyway whatsoever?
very concerned

Ms_T_2

please help!