PCC cancel PCN after complaint to BPA

skypilot

I complained to the BPA regarding VCS advising that they were unable to process my appeal as I hadn't provided the correct information i.e. the name of the driver etc. I also complained to VCS, in both cases I pointed out that the current BPA code of practice had been ignored.
BPA agreed with my position and advised that they would investigate.
I received a letter from VCS confirming that they had been notified of my complaint and that after considering the facts they realised that an administrative error had been made on their part.Hence as a gesture of good will they had cancelled the PCN. The BPA sent me confirmation of this and a copy of the letter from VCS.
The complaint to the BPA may be the reason that VCS acted as they did, so trying to be positive its nice to see that the BPA are taking a breech of their code seriously. The BPA have informed me that their investigation has now been closed.
Do both parties really think that we are so thick so that we don't recognise a standard template letter. Just another PCC chancing their arm to fill their coffers of other folks hard earned cash!
Finally , a big thank you to all forum members who helped me through the scenario.

Guys_Dad

You are so unlucky that you suffered the only admin mistake VCS made this year and I hope you are sincerely grateful to them extending goodwill to you as a result.

A fine example of a diligent PPC at work.

Guys_Dad

Skypilot - you need to see things from the other guy's point of view. I got the following which claims to be a copy of the internal PPC email of the same incident.

An unreasonable forum-aided malcontent had the cheek to complain to the BPA regarding our advising that we were unable to process their ludicrous appeal as they hadn't provided us with the name of the driver etc. They also wrote to us, trying to tell us - leading members of the BPA - the current BPA code of practice and saying it had been ignored. Damned cheek.

We are running a money collecting company here, offering a genuine service to landowners and law-abiding compliant parkers and haven't got time to follow each minute detail that the BPA put in their ever-changing guidelines. We believe that the driver should pay and having to spend £2.50 to get the Registered Keeper's name and address is a bleedin' liberty and a drain on our income.

BPA got in touch and said that Yes it was a pain, but they had to be seen to flex their muscles a few times and this complainant seemed a potential pain in the a*se who would probably take it to court. Well we know that even if we win there, it will finish up costing us a shedload of money. And, of course, being forum aided, the wretched motorist would no doubt appeal to POPLA (if we sent him a code, of course !), appeal on GPEOL and, being helped by his online anti- enforcement hobbyists, cost us a further £27..

I asked Sharon to knock up a suitably weasel worded reply (she's got a CSE in spelling and grammar you know ) saying we will offer a goodwill gesture and not chase the b*****ds any more. Suggested an admin error as the reason.

Oh - and asked her to notify the BPA (thought they were on our side!)
The motorist is probably so thick so that they won't recognise a standard template letter. Just another bl***y motorist chancing their arm to prevent law abiding heroic PCCs from providing a decent service and earning a modest crust!

Just thought I would produce a balanced picture.

skypilot

Guys_Dad wrote: »

Skypilot - you need to see things from the other guy's point of view. I got the following which claims to be a copy of the internal PPC email of the same incident.

An unreasonable forum-aided malcontent had the cheek to complain to the BPA regarding our advising that we were unable to process their ludicrous appeal as they hadn't provided us with the name of the driver etc. They also wrote to us, trying to tell us - leading members of the BPA - the current BPA code of practice and saying it had been ignored. Damned cheek.

We are running a money collecting company here, offering a genuine service to landowners and law-abiding compliant parkers and haven't got time to follow each minute detail that the BPA put in their ever-changing guidelines. We believe that the driver should pay and having to spend £2.50 to get the Registered Keeper's name and address is a bleedin' liberty and a drain on our income.

BPA got in touch and said that Yes it was a pain, but they had to be seen to flex their muscles a few times and this complainant seemed a potential pain in the a*se who would probably take it to court. Well we know that even if we win there, it will finish up costing us a shedload of money. And, of course, being forum aided, the wretched motorist would no doubt appeal to POPLA (if we sent him a code, of course !), appeal on GPEOL and, being helped by his online anti- enforcement hobbyists, cost us a further £27..

I asked Sharon to knock up a suitably weasel worded reply (she's got a CSE in spelling and grammar you know ) saying we will offer a goodwill gesture and not chase the b*****ds any more. Suggested an admin error as the reason.

Oh - and asked her to notify the BPA (thought they were on our side!)
The motorist is probably so thick so that they won't recognise a standard template letter. Just another bl***y motorist chancing their arm to prevent law abiding heroic PCCs from providing a decent service and earning a modest crust!

Just thought I would produce a balanced picture.

Do I detect a hint of cynicism. What is the forum coming to!!

The_Slithy_Tove

skypilot wrote: »

they realised that an administrative error had been made on their part.

They just can't stop themselves lying with every breath, can they?Administrative error my ****. They do this all the time. They know they shouldn't, but carry on regardless. Occasionally they get found out by the well informed, and trot out a non-apology as if they actually mean it (which, of course, they don't).

Folkiedave

And here is the letter I received from Steve Clark - May 12th after a similar complaint.

Thanks for your e-mail, the contents of which are noted.

I am writing to update you on the progress made with your case.

Firstly I am advised by VCS that they have cancelled the PCN and if you haven’t already received confirmation of this, you should soon.

This however was not the main aim of my investigation which was as you know, the concerns that you had regarding the content of their notices – in particular the requirement that the name of the driver must be provided if the motorist wishes to appeal. I agree with the contention that acceptance of appeals should not be conditional in this way and have advised VCS accordingly.

They have agreed to amend the wording that they use and I have signed off the amended document this afternoon.

I have closed the case file accordingly.

Kind regards

Steve Clark
Head of Operational Services
British Parking Association
Tel: 01444 447 307
Email: steve.c@britishparking.co.uk
Web: https://www.britishparking.co.uk

Coupon-mad

Wonder how many times the BPA have 'advised' VCS that they cannot insist on finding out who was driving. Surely one day 'Sharon at VCS' will stop filing her nails and remember not to use that old template.