Care Parking, Whitefield Metrolink, TfGM Manchester

Fight_the_good_fight

Thanks for the responses, in addition I was wondering if it was a plausible idea to submit a FOI to TFGM to request full details of the contract with the PPC and ask what kickback they received or would they have wriggle room as being commercially sensitive.

bod1467

I don't think you can ask in exactly that way, But ...

You can FOI request a copy of the contract between TfGM and Care Parking. (Any commercially sensitive parts should already be in an easily-redacted section - guidance was given about this as far back as 2004 I think. So if TfGM tried to argue that redacting the contract would be onerous then you can fire that straight back at them, or even pre-empt that excuse in your FOI).

You can (probably) also ask them how many parking charges were issued by Care Parking (e.g. in a financial or calendar year) and how much income TfGM derived from these charges during that same period.

prjohnsonnn10

So being a Wycombe resident i thought i would pursue WDC for full details of all correspondance on the changes made by WDC to the off street car parks . I asked for all correspondance between them and BPA and DVLA and also Council minutes concerning the matter. I got the following reply from them today............ v interesting !! They are trying to cite commercial sensitivities amongst other things - note that i have NOT asked for any of the contracts signed between parties , but simply asked for correspondance between WDC, BPA and DVLA on this matter.


If Bazter/ Bargepole and co are on here wld appreciate a steer on how to respond to this as plainly they need a firm reply from me to put them straight . I am not about to be fobbed off !!

Dear Mr xxxxxx
Thanks you for your email of 4 December where you requested information about communications with the BPA and DVLA. We do hold information falling within the terms of your request, however we need more time to consider this.
I wish to advise you that the following exemptions apply to the information that you have requested:
s.36(2)(b)(i) and (ii) Effective conduct of Public Affairs
s.42 – Legal Professional Privilege
s.43(2) – Commercial interests
By virtue of section10(3) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 where public authorities have to consider the balance of the public interest in relation to a request, they do not have to comply, they do not have to comply with the request until such time as is reasonable in the circumstances.
We have not yet reached a decision on the balance of the public interest . Due to the need to consider, in all the circumstances of the case, where the balance of the public interest lies in relation to the information that you have requested, we will not be able to respond to your request in full within 20 working days. I hope to let you have a response by 29 January 2015.
If you are unhappy with the way Wycombe District Council has handled your request etc etc etc blah blah blah.....


Letter was signed by the Parking Services Head - Robin Evans

Coupon-mad

Wonder if bargepole has seen this - I will ask him.

Fight_the_good_fight wrote: »

Thanks for the responses, in addition I was wondering if it was a plausible idea to submit a FOI to TFGM to request full details of the contract with the PPC and ask what kickback they received or would they have wriggle room as being commercially sensitive.

Yes! Try FOI wording like the ones submitted so far by 'S Bull' on whatdotheyknow, to Surrey County Council about District Enforcement infiltrating loads of Surrey Council building car parks with their usual drivel of a 'contractual fee' private land enforcement model. Should be easy to find with a search, I have seen the information gleaned so far in that FOI case and the replies are a real eye opener; he/she even got the original tender from the Council and the Jackanory 'pitch' from DE!

Fight_the_good_fight

Thanks CM,I am awaiting my POPLA appeal result, due towards the end of the month

I am currently writing a letter to TfGM outlining the shortcomings of THEIR clients, re mis use of POFA with regards to relevant land and byelaws and furthermore not being privately owned land .

I will also be informing DVLA of the clear and obvious breaches and in continuing to provide RK details would make them complicit in DPA offences :j

Fight_the_good_fight

I was reading through a FOI application yesterday showing the paper trail between the PPC and TfGM which included a number of draft copies of the license agreement for metrolink car parks. It was not until the final agreement had been signed that I noticed a pertinent phrase had been removed within the contract which had been present in all the earlier drafts, the words "Private land"

The email paper trail leading upto this final signed contract was heavily redacted and leads me to think may be that both parties are aware of the issue of private/ public land :j

daddydodo

OK so back on track with my appeal....
I sent off the 1st appeal to care parking on 5-Jan-1 5 which they acknowledged 7 days later. Am I right that they must let me know the decision within 35 days of receiving my appeal? If so then I think the time is up and they have not responded.

Could anyone advise what I should do now?
Has their claim lapsed?
Could care parking claim to have sent an appeal rejection letter (which I haven't received) which would mean my POPLA code has gone awol???

Thanks for your help.

Redx

complain to the BPA if they allege that

meanwhile, its sit and wait

daddydodo

Ok so I heard back from POPLA and my appeal is allowed. Seems like Care parking didn't even bother to submit any information. THanks to all for the help and advice.
I'll post my POPLA appeal here for reference and to help any others....

xxxxxxxxxxx (Appellant)

-v-
Anchor Security Services Ltd t/as Care Parking (Operator)

The Operator issued parking charge notice number xxxxx arising out

of a presence on private land.

The Appellant appealed against liability for the parking charge.

The Assessor has considered the evidence of both parties and has

determined that the appeal be allowed.

The Assessor’s reasons are as set out.

The Operator should now cancel the parking charge notice forthwith.


Reasons for the Assessor’s Determination

It is the Appellant’s case that the parking charge notice was issued

incorrectly.

The Operator has not produced a copy of the parking charge notice, nor any

evidence to show a breach of the conditions of parking occurred, nor any

evidence that shows what the conditions of parking, in fact, were.

Accordingly I have no option but to allow the appeal.

Shehla Pirwany

Assessor

Umkomaas

if they so obviously know when they are 'beaten', why protract this and stump up £27 without some fight? Bonkers!

Ours not to wonder why ...........