We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
PCN/Not in allocated bay/Breach of contract
Comments
-
Dig dig dig...Je suis Charlie.0
-
Have you checked whether you can post your own links yet?
s1289.photobucket.com/user/1Fawkes/media/BPA_zps805457af.png.html?sort=3&o=00 -
We are unable to provide information regarding your request for details of person etc as this is not available to the public"
So what do you think?
I think this is total drivel. The BPA appears to be totally ignorant of the Law (e.g. Business Names Act 1985 (as amended by the Companies Act 2006) and the Companies (Trading Disclosures) Regulations 2008). However, I don’t suppose that this should come as any great surprise.
In your next response, you may like to say something like...
“Having admitted that this sole trader’s details have not been made available to the public, may the BPA now confirm that as a result of the sole trader’s failure to comply with Trading Disclosures Regulations, their car park signs could not possibly have formed any contract between them and members of the public. May the BPA also confirm that this sole trader could therefore have no valid claim against any member of the public for alleged breach of contract”.0 -
And indeed that no notices or correspondence ever issued by CPMS had any legal standing whatsoever because they too did not disclose the true legal identity of the issuer.
BPA Ltd. also forgets that all its members are required to be on the Data Protection Register. The Data Protection Register is in the public domain, and it is not permitted to register under a trading name, so a sole trader has to register in their actual name. This is how we know that CPMS was in fact a trading name of Lesley Cubbin of Wigan.
The ineptitude of BPA Ltd. knows no bounds.Je suis Charlie.0 -
I'd give it a few more days and then start complaining to DVLA and your MP. BPA Ltd. is a private company and will happily ignore you if it finds your questions too awkward.Je suis Charlie.0
-
Yes but if the DVLA fobs you off you can complain to your MP and the Parliamentary Ombudsman.
One last try with BPA?
Will you please tell me on what date Car Park Management Services (CPMS) Ltd became an approved operator. This was NOT 1st May 2013, because the company did not exist then.
As a limited company Car Park Management Services (CPMS) Ltd is NOT the same legal entity as Lesley Cubbin (a sole trader) who was trading as CPMS Manchester or other variants of CPMS. That a limited company is not the same legal entity as a sole trader is surely trivially obvious to you?
Your contention that the names of approved operators who are sole traders are confidential is ludicrous because sole traders are required by law to declare their true name in all their business dealings. Accordingly any sole trader approved operator who does not declare their true name on their signage, notices etc. is breaking the law, failing to enter into any valid contracts, and failing to issue any legally valid notices. Surely, given that the BPA Ltd. is "driving up standards", it should be a matter of the greatest concern to you if a member is breaking both the law and your Code of Practice in these ways?
If you refuse to properly answer my request I will be obliged to complain to DVLA that I suspect an approved operator is obtaining keeper details relating to parking events that occurred before it was an approved operator and possibly even before it existed. If I am obliged to make such a complaint I will at the same time complain about the BPA Ltd.'s refusal to answer my questions about the true legal identities of approved operators and precisely when operators became approved.Je suis Charlie.0 -
Tone it down if you wish! I am not known for my subtlety!
The BPA is there to serve the interests of its members. It often puts these ahead of the law.Je suis Charlie.0 -
Didn't you already make that point? Although it's an excellent point and can't hurt to re-iterate.Je suis Charlie.0
-
Pile on the pressure. Copy the letter(s) to Trading Standards, Companies House and your MP. If you are a member off a Motoring Association, copy it to them, Create a storm of paper.You never know how far you can go until you go too far.0
-
Good luck with TS, it's a bit of a lottery depending on where you live. The Deep obviously has success with his local TS, but where I live they will not even speak to the general public.Je suis Charlie.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 351.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.7K Spending & Discounts
- 244.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.1K Life & Family
- 257.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards