The IPC Ltd - Independent Parking Committee - **UPDATE**

Stroma

Who have you complained too ? It's our duty for them to receive multiple complaints, have you sent it to the foi address at the dvla or somebody specific ?

kirkbyinfurnesslad_2

An appeal to the new IAS based on loss and contract etc will be interesting and having a look at where parkshield are based, i know of two users on here and pepipoo who may be willing to get tickets!

So ill send pms and see what they say

HO87

Stroma wrote: »

Who have you complained too ? It's our duty for them to receive multiple complaints, have you sent it to the foi address at the dvla or somebody specific ?

Its gone to a named person but my feeling is that maybe this one needs to be escalated. I'm awaiting an email at present - hopefully I can update further later.

James_N

HO87 wrote: »

Its gone to a named person but my feeling is that maybe this one needs to be escalated. I'm awaiting an email at present - hopefully I can update further later.

Please post up complaints routes when available so more of us can make targeted complaints.

HO87

Update: I have spent much of the day in email exchanges with various parties. The upshot is that there are numerous potential issues in play with IPC's CoP and its approval by the DVLA. Discussions continue and I will provide details of the person to complain to in due course.

It would be wrong to think that the DVLA, in performance of their implicit duty to protect the public, ever accepted the proposition that they seize the initiative and take control of a notionally common CoP. A conclusion one might reasonably draw at the moment is that the DVLA has lost sight of that duty and in approving the IPC's CoP has further cast the public adrift in the increasingly choppy PPC seas. However, there are a number of ways of viewing the new CoP. Save to say it would seem that the rationale behind it is rather different from that of the BPA - and it is not all negative.

I suggest that what we should really keep our eyes open for is the BPA's reaction to it.

Stroma

The rationale behind it is to give out unlawful penalties that have no reasonable loss associated with their invoices. I am sorry HO87 I am very sceptical of this whole new regime of a licence to print money.

They don't change their spots do the scammers, they just dress it up a little differently, but scratch the surface and its the same almost criminal element behind them

HO87

Update: After much to-ing and fro-ing the DVLA are now back in discussion with the ITC Ltd in an effort to resolve their requirement that potential appellants to their Independent Appeals Service disclose the driver's details thereby circumventing POFA. Its only taken six weeks to get this far so don't expect an answer this side of Christmas. The person dealing with this - if anyone is minded to join the fray is:

Donna Wright: [EMAIL="Donna.Wright@dvla.gsi.gov.uk"]Donna.Wright@dvla.gsi.gov.uk[/EMAIL] from the Data Sharing and Protection Policy staff.

Umkomaas

It makes you wonder why the DVLA didn't identify this before ATA approval was given, after all it is so fundamental, set in the context of PoFA. How experienced are DVLA staff who are dealing with this? It seems to have taken the forums to spot and point this out to them!

Stroma

Think it's just about the post above your new update, a licence to print money, they are not interested in anything else

HO87

Well, here we are in March and there is still no answer to report. The DVLA assert that they have been in prolonged discussion with the IPC and have now sought guidance from the DfT. Its seems that the DVLA view the issue as "complex" but have not deigned to explain what the complexity is - despite being asked to do so. The Agency continue to promise an answer "as soon as possible" but will provide no indication as to how long that actually means.