UKPC "altered" Photo Evidence - now on BBC

g0wfv

ampersand wrote: »

Your link works trisontana. Merci.
From book of face, it didn't for me.
#
At 1.58 in...who did they find capable of writing something for r5live to read out?
Who gripped the crayon?

We need to correct r5live and Simone's MP, Carl McCartney:these unenforceable invoices are NOT FINES.
I sincerely hope the MP did not use this incorrect term in his letter to the Secretary of State for Transport.

You mean Mr Karl McCartney JP MP to whom I wrote on this very subject over the weekend.

What struck me the most were his comments along the lines of "... as a good Tory politician, I am not for more regulation ..."

Wake up Mr McCartney; this 'business sector' is woefully in need of further regulation to ensure that PPCs cannot take the motorist for every penny by issuing threats and intimidation, and to ensure that they themselves adhere to the law of the land when setting up a site (gaining the correct planning and advertising consents)

PPCs have obviously never heard of ex turpi causa which I've never heard mentioned as an appeal/defence point on here or anywhere else.

They need to be brought to task on their legal practices before issuing legal claims against the unsuspecting motorist.

The_Deep

So, are you saying that, if it can be proven that the signs did not have permission, (does that constitute an illegal act?), the invoice should not have been sent?

g0wfv

If certain permissions under English law ie the Town and Country Planning Act and the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations then any signage or ANPR equipment erected may not be lawful.

This as we know breaches the BPA CoP which in turn breaches the KADOE contract with the DVLA. Both of these arguments I have seen used.

In addition, ex turpi causa may also apply as by erecting signs and/or cameras without permission from the relevant authorities (which I would argue is unlawful) negates any subsequent claim they may subsequently bring against a motorist by virtue of the fact that they have broken the law to put the motorist in the position where they could issue legal action.

trisontana

I see the Daily Mail is now reporting this story. Unfortunately the comments section is full of idiots saying ignore these fake fines and don't pay , they will never take you to court.. I bet the likes of Parking Eye are rubbing their hands in glee with all those default judgments they will get.

ampersand

I have attempted to post a corrective, but sans succès, for some reason.
Asked therm to remove 'f - - -s' from headline.

Still waiting for their replacement password.

Guys_Dad

The City of London's National Fraud Intelligence Bureau has now launched a probe, Action Fraud confirmed.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3229165/Is-PROOF-private-parking-firms-scamming-motorists-Drivers-say-timings-photos-doctored-legally-parked-cars-issued-fines.html#ixzz3lM9CxjUn
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

However, When contacted, POPLA said that it could not comment on individual cases.

Half_way

Now would be a good time for anyone who has fallen victim to the double dip scam, and any other sharp practice to come forward and highlight the other issues with other BPA/IPC members.
It will be easy for the BPA etc to state that its a few rogue employees, or even a rogue operator, however if the actions of other PPCs can be highlighted then things could become a little interesting for the likes of the BPA and IPC.

It may also be worth highlighting and making the media aware of some of the bizzare IAS results, and even how intertwined the whole so called IAS is with the red cow lot.

In an ideal world, the DVLA would put an immediate stop to companies accessing its data for the purposes of so called car park management until a full and thorough public review is carried out with input from the public and a few experts in consumer / trade regualtions

Ivor_Pecheque

Interesting definition of "Corporate Fraud" on the Serious Fraud Office website... "Corporate fraud
What is corporate fraud?

Fraud occurring within an organisation is known as corporate fraud. This involves deliberate dishonesty to deceive the public, investors or lending companies, usually resulting in financial gain to the criminals or organisation."

http://www.sfo.gov.uk/fraud/what-is-fraud/corporate-fraud.aspx

hoohoo

DM is now reporting that motorists will be refunded. All dubious tickets issued by the wardens in question will have money refunded direct to bank account.

ManxRed

But only if the motorists pipe up I presume?

They're not seriously going to contact everyone themselves?