Hospital Complaint For Breach Of Equality Act 2010

ManxRed

I should clarify as well, that the variation referred to in clause 17.3 would need to be correctly worded. It needs to contain specific reference to the original agreement, with a description of that agreement, and the terms being varied, and needs to be signed and dated by both parties.

A letter signed by one party wouldn't cut it.

Fergie76

Amended DVLA response:

I must dispute your findings for the following reasons:

1. Your conclusion on the validity of the two letters, dated 26 Apr 11 and 7 Jul 14 is flawed. As I have maintained all along these letters cannot and do not supersede the original contract dated 10 Feb 98. As confirmed by the hospital, the contract is:

[FONT=&quot]The contract provided is therefore the correct and sole documentation related to the current operation.[/FONT]

The above statement is categorical. The contract is the SOLE DOCUMENTATION related to the current operation, therefore even the hospital does not recognise the validity of these two letters and neither does the contract, which states:

17.3 No variation of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless it is in writing, refers specifically to this Agreement and is duly executed by each party.

After consulting my contract expert, he states that for the contract to be legally amended it must be:

correctly worded and contain specific reference to the original agreement, with a description of that agreement, and the terms being varied, and needs to be signed and dated by both parties.

As you will see, both letters do not meet the above conditions, therefore it cannot superseded the original legally binding contract and therefore has no validity in law.


2. As I have proved that the original contract is still the ‘correct and sole documentation related to the current operation’ that means that there is no authority given for the collection of parking charges and therefore again, APU had no reasonable cause to obtain the registered keepers details.

As I have not proved beyond all reasonable doubt that APOCA Parking (UK) Ltd have no right to operate at this hospital, I require the DVLA to suspend their access to the DVLA database immediately to stop breach of the Data Protection Act by DVLA.

Fergie76

ICO letter amended to incorporate amps and Manx's comments:

[FONT=&quot]Thank you for your reply yesterday, although I must dispute your findings and these are the reasons why:[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]1. You correctly state that Private Parking Companies can only apply for data if a member of the BPA or IPC, however they must also abide by that Trade Associations Code of Practice (COP). I have so far identified 5 breaches of the COP by APU, which the BPA are currently investigating, however the main breach would mean that no ticket should have been issued in the first place and therefore no reasonable cause of obtaining the registered keepers details has ever existed:[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]16.5[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]If your landowner provides a concession that allows parking for disabled people, if a vehicle displays a valid Blue Badge you must not issue it with parking charge notices.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The car was displaying a blue badge, therefore APU have broken the BPA COP and therefore had no reasonable cause.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]2. Your conclusion on the validity of the two letters, dated 26 Apr 11 and 7 Jul 14 is flawed. As I have maintained all along these letters cannot and do not supersede the original contract dated 10 Feb 98. As confirmed by the hospital, the contract is:[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The contract provided is therefore the correct and sole documentation related to the current operation.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The above statement is categorical. The contract is the SOLE DOCUMENTATION related to the current operation, therefore even the hospital does not recognise the validity of these two letters and neither does the contract, which states:[/FONT]

17.3 No variation of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless it is in writing, refers specifically to this Agreement and is duly executed by each party.

[FONT=&quot]After consulting my contract expert, he states that for the contract to be legally amended it must be:[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]correctly worded and contain specific reference to the original agreement, with a description of that agreement, and the terms being varied, and needs to be signed and dated by both parties.[/FONT]

As you will see, both letters do not meet the above conditions, therefore it cannot superseded the original legally binding contract and therefore has no validity in law.


[FONT=&quot]3. As I have proved that the original contract is still the ‘correct and sole documentation related to the current operation’ that means that there is no authority given for the collection of parking charges and therefore again, APU had no reasonable cause to obtain the registered keepers details.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]I now require the ICO take the appropriate action for a breach of the DPA by the DVLA. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]On the second point of breaches to the FOI Act by the Trust, I would like to pursue them to the fullest extent of the ICO’s powers and would like to know what action you have taken.[/FONT]

Fergie76

Second email to DVLA in reply to their second email yesterday:

Are you saying that Brian Dodge was incorrect to state that:

Unfortunately, the DVLA cannot regulate the practices of private car parking companies. The Agency accredits trade associations to ensure that those who request information are legitimate companies that operate within an enforceable Code of Practice. Accredited Trade Associations (ATAs) have responsibility for ensuring compliance with their code of practice so when we receive an enquiry or complaint relating to the practices of a private parking company, we pass it to the relevant ATA to investigate and inform us of the outcome.

It is rather concerning that your complaints Department does not know the correct complaints procedure to follow when dealing with complaints. I trust that the DVLA will conduct some internal training with Brian Dodge to ensure he knows the correct procedure and to ensure that he follows it?

Under the Freedom of Information Act, can you please supply with full unredacted copies of all correspondence held by the DVLA that concerns the investigation into my complaint?

bod1467

DVLA letter ... As I have not proved ....

Delete not or change to now.

Fergie76

Good spot, Bod.

ampersand

[FONT=&quot]Thank you for your reply yesterday.

[strengthen to]I dispute your findings and these are the reasons why:[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]1. You correctly state that Private Parking Companies can only apply for data if a member of the BPA or IPC, however they must also abide by that Trade Associations Code of Practice (COP). I have so far identified 5 breaches of the COP by APU, which the BPA are currently investigating, however the main breach would mean that no ticket should have been issued in the first place and therefore no reasonable cause of obtaining the registered keeper'sCOLOR=Blue]possessive apostrophe[/COLOR details has ever existed:[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]16.5[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]If your landowner provides a concession that allows parking for disabled people, if a vehicle displays a valid Blue Badge you must not issue it with parking charge notices.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The car was displaying a blue badge, therefore APU have broken the BPA COP and therefore had no reasonable cause.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]2. Your conclusion on the validity of the two letters, dated 26 Apr 11 and 7 Jul 14 is flawed. As I have maintained all along these letters cannot and do not supersede the original contract dated 10 Feb 98. As confirmed by the hospital[STRIKE], the contract is[/STRIKE]:[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The contract provided is therefore the correct and sole documentation related to the current operation.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The above statement is categorical. The contract is the SOLE DOCUMENTATION related to the current operation, therefore even the hospital does not recognise the validity of these two letters and neither does the contract, which states:[/FONT]

17.3 No variation of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless it is in writing, refers specifically to this Agreement and is duly executed by each party.

[FONT=&quot][toughened[FONT=&quot]][/FONT]Expert contract advice following current Law decla[FONT=&quot]res[/FONT] that for a contract to be legally amended, it must be:[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]correctly worded and contain specific reference to the original agreement, with a description of that agreement, and the terms being varied, and needs to be signed and dated by both parties.[/FONT]

As you will see,[STRIKE] both letters do not meet[/STRIKE]neither letter satisfies those conditions, therefore they cannot, do not, supersede[STRIKE]d[/STRIKE] the original legally binding contract [STRIKE]and therefore has no [/STRIKE]

Those letters have NO validity or amendment value in contract law.

[FONT=&quot]3. As I have proved that the original contract is still the ‘correct and sole documentation related to the current operation’ that means that there is no authority given for the collection of parking charges and therefore again, APU had no reasonable cause to obtain the registered keeper's[another [FONT=&quot]poss.apost[FONT=&quot]. [/FONT]here][/FONT] details.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]I now require the ICO take the appropriate action for a breach of the DPA by the DVLA. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]On the second point of breaches to the FOI Act by the Trust, [STRIKE]I would like to pursue them[/STRIKE], [FONT=&quot]t[/FONT]hey must be pursued to the fullest extent of the ICO’s powers and I would like to know what action you have taken.[[FONT=&quot]su[/FONT]ggestion only, rather than frame a personal wish which they can flannel away]

[FONT=&quot]#

[FONT=&quot]Again, [FONT=&quot]suggestions only Fergie, aside from the o[FONT=&quot]dd typo.
[FONT=&quot]True grit from you.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Think of them as England at cricket this morning. [FONT=&quot]Join me as NZ:-)[/FONT][/FONT]
[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]

NWSteve

Is it worth referring to the different APCOA companies by their full business names, to clarify and reinforce which legal entity is the one in the wrong and avoid any possible further 'misunderstandings' by the ICO/DVLA?

Fergie76

I always try too, may have missed one or two though....

Fergie76

Just sent the hospital another FOI Request:

In addition to my email on Mon 16 Feb 15 and the FOI request contained within it, can you please provide me the following information under the FOI Act – how many parking charges have been issued at Northwick Park and St Marks Hospital, since I have brought it to your attention that APCOA Parking (UK) Ltd have no authority to issue the charges on 28 Nov 14?