Parliament petition - Ban UKPC from being able to recieve driver information.

LJamesP

Dear fellow Humans, action needs to be taken against UKPC and companies like them. This could be a presidence and start a dominoes effect.

My petition:
Ban UKPC from being able to recieve driver information from the DVLA.

Please reffer to a previos thread:
hxxp://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5390608

I’ve now made a petition – will you sign it?
Click this link to sign the petition:

hxxps://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/118139/sponsors/Lpr1yd4oWanBTGlXuTRM

If this petition gets enough signatures then it will be discussed at Parliament.

Thanks everyone for your support,

Lewis. :beer:

Fruitcake

You should explain what the petition is for in your title.

Fruitcake

LJamesP wrote: »

Dear fellow Humans, action needs to be taken against UKPC and companies like them. This could be a presidence and start a dominoes effect.

My petition:
Ban UKPC from being able to recieve driver information from the DVLA.

Please reffer to a previos thread:
hxxp://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5390608

I’ve now made a petition – will you sign it?
Click this link to sign the petition:

hxxps://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/118139/sponsors/Lpr1yd4oWanBTGlXuTRM

Thanks everyone for your support,

Lewis. :beer:

Live link to the petition above.


https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5390608

LJamesP

Imagine if the DVLA were to put their foot down once and for all and actually act lawfully when it comes to correctly issuing data for a change.. This part of the Forum would cease to exist!

ManxRed

They won't do that. There is far too much revenue involved for the DVLA as well as key companies with 'friends' in governmental positions with a lot at stake (one rhymes with Lapita) for this to ever come to an end, unless by external forces.

The fact that the DVLA already refers incidences of reported clear breaches of their own contracts with PPCs to a company who is not even party to any of these agreements and is run by PPC execs (I'm talking about the BPA Ltd by the way) is a clear statement of how much it cares about 'taking its responsibilities towards the protection of public data seriously'

Northlakes

ManxRed wrote: »

They won't do that. There is far too much revenue involved for the DVLA as well as key companies with 'friends' in governmental positions with a lot at stake (one rhymes with Lapita) for this to ever come to an end, unless by external forces.

The fact that the DVLA already refers incidences of reported clear breaches of their own contracts with PPCs to a company who is not even party to any of these agreements and is run by PPC execs (I'm talking about the BPA Ltd by the way) is a clear statement of how much it cares about 'taking its responsibilities towards the protection of public data seriously'

This is why the parking industry both Council and Private operators need greater regulation. There are far too many vested interests from the DVLA to the retail landowners who's only concern is increased income.

I recently had a bus lane violation from a County Council which had outsourced the administration to a private parking company. It was clear from the start the PPC had only one intention and that was to extract money. The charge was unlawfully enlarged during the appeal process and the CC couldn't care less as they were saving £400,000 per annum in admin costs.
Needless to say I won my case at the TPT thanks to help on Pepipoo and tactical knowledge gained on this forum.

The industry needs regulation so that the obvious abuses are cut out. We have a system where 'foxes are in charge of the hen hut' and until there is a truly 'independent' regulator these abuses will continue.

oldagetraveller

To be pedantic James - it should be "receive", not recieve and "keeper details, not driver details.
I know it might come across as being a bit petty/picky but this type of basic error does deter me from signing such petitions.

LJamesP

Im Sure that David will understand what i mean :')

beamerguy

LJamesP wrote: »

Im Sure that David will understand what i mean :')

I doubt it ??

Seriously, presentation is paramount when talking to others.

Umkomaas

LJamesP wrote: »

Im Sure that David will understand what i mean :')

Unless you can get a minimum of 10,000 signatures, it won't even be passing under David's eyes (or any of his minions for that matter).

Even Barry Beavis' petition has ground to a halt - well short of 8,000 signatures after a whole two months of quite heavy 'marketing' on a number of parking media platforms. So if that is floundering I don't hold out great hopes for yours - sorry.

The_Deep

LJamesP wrote: »

Im Sure that David will understand what i mean :')

Perhaps, but people who use "your" when they mean "you are", "there" when they mean "their", and who abuse the apostrophe, do little to enhance their credibility imo.