Help! Ukpc have 'photographic evidence' which isn't real

Dublindel

I have a case being sent to me concerning UK parking controls with the same claims of timestamp tampering. I will have to check it first but my question is!!! Does pranky want this paper evidence...

DCodd

Dublindel wrote: »

I have a case being sent to me concerning UK parking controls with the same claims of timestamp tampering. I will have to check it first but my question is!!! Does pranky want this paper evidence...

Check the other thread you posted on. PP has responded to your question there.

The_Slithy_Tove

Dublindel wrote: »

I have a case being sent to me concerning UK parking controls with the same claims of timestamp tampering. I will have to check it first but my question is!!! Does pranky want this paper evidence...

His blog would suggest that he is very interested in further instances of photo timestamp fiddling.

fil_cad

This needs to go viral

MothballsWallet

trisontana wrote: »

If this story proves to be true, I wonder what excuse UKPC will come up with?

(1) this was a rogue operative and he has now been given the boot.
or
(2) He was unfamiliar with the camera and pressed the wrong button and he has now been sent for retraining.

.

Yeah, "retraining" on "how to press the wrong button without being caught out by people with a higher IQ" :rotfl:

Marktheshark

I think you should contact the police over this matter and ask to speak with the fraud investigation unit as you wish to report a company attempting to obtain money by deception.
Contrary to the Fraud act 2006 sections 2:
The defendant:

• made a false representation
• dishonestly
• knowing that the representation was or might be untrue or misleading
• with intent to make a gain for himself or another, to cause loss to another or to expose another to risk of loss.

Section 4 by abusing a position of legal authority covered by POFA 2012.
The defendant:

• occupies a position in which he was expected to safeguard, or not to act against, the financial interests of another person
• abused that position
• dishonestly
• intending by that abuse to make a gain/cause a loss

Section 6 had possession of an article they intended / intend to use in fraud, in this case a falsified photograph bearing a falsified time stamp.


Section 7 Making supplying articles for use in fraud :
In this case a parking charge notice issued as fraudulent document to gain financial gain.

• makes, adapts, supplies or offers to supply any article;
• for use in the course of or in connection with fraud;
• knowing that it is designed or adapted for use in the course of or in connection with fraud (Section 7 (1) (a)) or
• intending it to be used to commit or assist in the commission of fraud (Section 7 (1) (b).

That all the above offences are subject to section 12 of the fraud act :

Liability of company officers for offences by company (Section 12)

This section repeats the effect of Section 18 of the Theft Act 1968. It provides that company officers who are party to the commission of an offence by the company will be liable to be charged with the offence as well as the company.



The maximum penalty for offences under Sections 1, 7 and 9 and is 12 months' imprisonment on summary conviction and 10 years' imprisonment on conviction on indictment.
Section 10 of the Act increases the maximum penalty for offences contrary to Section 458 of the Companies Act 1985 to 10 years' imprisonment.
The maximum penalty for an offence under Sections 6 and 11 is 12 months' imprisonment on summary conviction and 5 years' imprisonment on conviction on indictment.


Insist that such a brazen and deliberate act of fraud which carries a ten year jail term for breach of section 7 that also breaches several sections of the fraud act 2006 must be investigated and you will be writing to your MP to ask them to request the chief constable supervises the investigations.


It is nothing less than is deserved, what they are doing is in my opinion Fraud here.

trisontana

The latest example shown on PP is just laughable. They would have us believe the same car had its boot lid open for two hours and no cars came or went in that time:-

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/further-fake-times-involving-uk-parking.html

Marktheshark

It is done by phone app, the user selects the times of the offence such as overstay and fills in a form and submits the pictures, they get £10 commission to the best of my knowledge.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=co.uk.theappgarden.ukpc&hl=en_GB
http://www.ukparkingcontrol.com/iTicket

enfield_freddy

Marktheshark wrote: »

It is done by phone app, the user selects the times of the offence such as overstay and fills in a form and submits the pictures, they get £10 commission to the best of my knowledge.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=co.uk.theappgarden.ukpc&hl=en_GB
http://www.ukparkingcontrol.com/iTicket

total scum , it is neither ANPR or ticketing , IF someone is taking photo's they MUST be in full uniform with ID and issue a ticket.


time this racket was stopped.


lets have the next case of this in court , and ask "the ticketer" his full time job , and sight of his uniform and ID (at close notice)




did I say they were scum .


this was not the idea they had in mind when setting up new laws in 2012.

Minnie87

Wow parking prankster knows his stuff!! Thank you!

So I phoned the police today and was basically fobbed off with "it's a case for trading standards" even after I quoted certain laws etc.

This is so frustrating! What should my next step be? I'm still waiting for a decision from POPLA but this needs reporting by all of us that they are trying to scam! Who do I go to now??

I will keep post updated with any news as it comes. Thank you everyone for advice and support x