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

bazster

As far as the police are concerned fraud was decriminalised about 15 years ago.

HO87

bazster wrote: »

As far as the police are concerned fraud was decriminalised about 15 years ago.

Sadly I agree. An awful lot of effort could be expended in attempting to get them to take a formal report. They might, under pressure, do so but I'd just bet a pound to a pinch that nothing comes of it. The effort would be better used in ensuring the evidence is brought to the attention of Trading Standards. I wonder if the Watchdog team or Rogue Traders might be tempted? It would be interesting to see one Trouserfire's explanation of that!

Herzlos

Everyone should be getting involved. Including the ceos of eqch company using the car park and the motoring organisations

Half_way

Marktheshark wrote: »

Once brought to the attention of the people owning said car park, they become complicit in that fraud, the company officers are culpable in law with up to ten years prison.
One has to think issuing a private summons against both parties, the ceo and officers of said supermarket and their agents the parking firm might just focus them as to what they are getting involved with.

One of the big issues with PPCs is the way landowners, supermarkets etc try and distance themselves from them with the "nothing to do with us contact scumbag parking who deal with our car parks" type response, the sooner that those who take on these parasitic parking companies are held to account the better, if we could see store managers, and even the customer service desk robots ( who parrot the nothing to do with us line )being arrested and charged with some sort of aiding and abetting type offence the better, and as soon as store managers, regional, local or whatever start to feel real pressure the better.

HO87

Marktheshark wrote: »

Once brought to the attention of the people owning said car park, they become complicit in that fraud, the company officers are culpable in law with up to ten years prison.

Only if they encourage it to continue

Marktheshark wrote: »

One has to think issuing a private summons against both parties, the ceo and officers of said supermarket and their agents the parking firm might just focus them as to what they are getting involved with.

Noble sentiments. However, who is going to fund the action - and the investigation/evidence gathering that will compile the evidence? Are the staff members, managers and directors going to be given the opportunity to answer the allegations before court - as PACE requires? If so how will their attendance at an interview be secured?

And the CPS will then take over the prosecution and immediately discontinue it? That's the risk.

I suggest that civil actions - tort of deceit - are far more likely to get traction and will cost considerably less.

photome

Thieving scumbags

Why is no one in any authority stamping down on them

Makes my blood boil

bazster

HO87 wrote: »

I suggest that civil actions - tort of deceit - are far more likely to get traction and will cost considerably less.

A civil action could only be brought by someone who has suffered a loss. These folk we know about who have this evidence of faked times haven't paid, so what would they be bringing an action for?

iconoclus

How about they inform the PPC that they consider the claim to be malicious. If they do not immediately discontinue and abandon it then any and all reasonable costs incurred in defending it will be claimed.


These costs could be considerable in terms of evidence gathering alone. Altogether there could be a claim for £100's against the PPC.

Guys_Dad

iconoclus wrote: »

How about they inform the PPC that they consider the claim to be malicious. If they do not immediately discontinue and abandon it then any and all reasonable costs incurred in defending it will be claimed.


These costs could be considerable in terms of evidence gathering alone. Altogether there could be a claim for £100's against the PPC.

Because the PPC will see that they have been rumbled, cancel and then continue as before with some other innocents.

This is a perfect case for Watchdog and also, as said, for Trading Standards. As well as that, the cases on Parking Prankster's blog need to be formally presented to the BPA demanding they investigate and that, if they do not, then a large stink will be raised in relation to their right to be an accredited trade association. They have rules and it is their explicit duty to yphold these.

You can see the reason why this has occurred. The warden is incentivised to either get a set number of victims per week , probably with bonuses, and is being thoroughly dishonest and, by the pictures, stupid as well. The PPC should be suspended for a long time and they, in turn, need to root out and fire everyone who is party to this fraud - managing director down, if they are ever to re-gain BPA accreditation.

nigelbb

I suspect the reason this scam appears in several car parks is because rogue employees have been tipping off one another with details of how to operate the scam by altering the clock on their cameras. Similar to the way that details of how to hack phone voicemails spread through certain newspapers.