Response from my MP

Carthesis

Well, following on from my first contact with my MP (listed here http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=71483189&postcount=54), and my response to her first answer (listed here http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=71483344&postcount=57), I have today gotten an email from here again, concerning a response she got from the DCLG Minister responsible:

Dear Mr XXXXXX,

Further to my previous email, please see attached a copy of the response I have received from DCLG.

As you will see, this is really no answer at all. Given that the consultation referred to closed 18 months ago, I am not particularly impressed that the best the Minister can do is 'I'm still thinking about it'.

I will following up on this with a formal written Parliamentary question to the Secretary of State, asking when he expects to publish his response to the consultation. In all honesty I think it would be too much to hope for to expect them to leap into action, but some pressure being exerted might at least move things along in the right direction.

With best wishes,

Gill Furniss MP

About the best I can say about her response is that at least she's honest, and appears at least to be as disappointed in the poor response as I am.

For reference, the letter from DCLG is below:

Thank you for your letter dated 20th October to the Rt Hon Sajid Javid MP on behalf of your constituent, Mr Carthesis, of [address], about private parking. I am replying as this mater falls within my ministerial responsibilities.

I share your and Mr Carthesis' concerns about the private parking sector. Private car parking companies engaged in enforcement activities should act in a proportionate manner. The discussion paper your constituent refers to, "Parking Reform: Tackling Unfair Practices", was as a result of the Government's concerns about the private parking sector. Please reassure your constituent that I am actively considering the responses to the discussion paper and options for reform.

Marcus Jones MP

marcus.jones@communities.gsi.gov.uk

Dept. for Communities and Local Government
Fry Building
2 Marsham STreet
London
SW1P 4DF

As you can see, it isn't the best response. I will be contacting Gill Furness MP again, asking her if she has reviewed, considered or passed along the explicit cases I pointed out to her in my second email.

I would also recommend that anyone who writes to their MP as part of the BMPA process that C-M and various others on here are actively encouraging support for should, in addition to their MP and the PM, copy in both Sajid Javid MP and Marcus Jones MP.

Let's bury them under the weight of complaints about specific cases, so they can't come away with the idea that the "discussion paper" isn't representative of the behaviour of these fine, upstanding, moral, honest, decent and caring PPCs.

beamerguy

Carthesis wrote: »

Well, following on from my first contact with my MP (listed here http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=71483189&postcount=54), and my response to her first answer (listed here http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=71483344&postcount=57), I have today gotten an email from here again, concerning a response she got from the DCLG Minister responsible:


About the best I can say about her response is that at least she's honest, and appears at least to be as disappointed in the poor response as I am.

For reference, the letter from DCLG is below:


As you can see, it isn't the best response. I will be contacting Gill Furness MP again, asking her if she has reviewed, considered or passed along the explicit cases I pointed out to her in my second email.

I would also recommend that anyone who writes to their MP as part of the BMPA process that C-M and various others on here are actively encouraging support for should, in addition to their MP and the PM, copy in both Sajid Javid MP and Marcus Jones MP.

Let's bury them under the weight of complaints about specific cases, so they can't come away with the idea that the "discussion paper" isn't representative of the behaviour of these fine, upstanding, moral, honest, decent and caring PPCs.

So ... Rt Hon Sajid Javid MP simply passes the buck.
And these MP's wonder why people think they are worthless

Gill Furniss MP has said more than most MP's but will she persue it through to a question in the House at PM's Questions Time ?

What would Mrs May give as her reply ...... will it be a bog standard "copy and paste" reply that Marcus Jones MP gives everyone.

Right now, Marcus Jones and the government are holding the motorist in contempt and allowing this scam to continue.
Why on earth would Mrs May even to begin to think that she could be elected properly by the british public, far too many holes are appearing.

Fot those of you who have a negative response from YOUR MP, you know those who accept the Marcus Jones story, you should let them know that there is at least one MP, Gill Furness who actually is interested in keeping her seat.

Everyone needs to ask their MP to take this up in the House.
It will show how credible they are and indeed prove to you if they worth voting for again

The_Slithy_Tove

beamerguy wrote: »

Right now, Marcus Jones and the government are holding the motorist in contempt and allowing this scam to continue.

He should also be called up for making blatent untruths - yes, I mean telling LIES. If he were really "actively considering the responses to the discussion paper and options for reform," surely some conclusion would have been reached by now. If he's said "it's in that big pile of stuff I can't be @rsed to do anything about", he might be said to be telling the truth.

beamerguy

The_Slithy_Tove wrote: »

He should also be called up for making blatent untruths - yes, I mean telling LIES. If he were really "actively considering the responses to the discussion paper and options for reform," surely some conclusion would have been reached by now. If he's said "it's in that big pile of stuff I can't be @rsed to do anything about", he might be said to be telling the truth.

Totally agree, I have said before ... what's in it for Marcus Jones ???

Could Theresa May ask the BIG question ???

Carthesis

Well I wrote back to her:

Thank you for your response. I am appreciative of your efforts in this regard.

Obviously, I am as disappointed as you by the response from Marcus Jones MP and the DCLG. Unfortunately, i do not get the impression that any of the responsible people - either Marcus Jones, Sajid Javid, or anyone at DCLG, is as concerned about this issue as they perhaps should be. Nor do I get the impression that there is likely to be any substantial improvement in the situation forthcoming, "active consideration" or not.

I would ask that, if you are able to follow this up, that you do so. i would also urge you (if you have not already) to review the sample cases which I included in my letter/email to you on 20/10/2016. These are cases where these private parking companies are targeting vulnerable people, often for the most trivial of "offences", and are causing significant harm as a result. I would also ask that you review some of the recent cases which are recorded on the blog of 'The Parking Prankster' at http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/. These are people who are being harassed and subsequently taken to court, and having to defend themselves in front of a judge for similar trivial offences, such as having the temerity to park in their own parking space at a block of flats. Please consider how you would feel in some of these situations.

Again, I appreciate the efforts you have already made, and will be grateful for any further influence you can bring to bear in this matter.

Yours sincerely

At this point, all I can do is wait and see. At least she seems to be willing to kick up a bit of a stink.

As an aside, I also got a response from the ICO about my complaint...

DollyDee_2

Oooooh, what does it say?

bargepole

The_Slithy_Tove wrote: »

He should also be called up for making blatent untruths - yes, I mean telling LIES. If he were really "actively considering the responses to the discussion paper and options for reform," surely some conclusion would have been reached by now. If he's said "it's in that big pile of stuff I can't be @rsed to do anything about", he might be said to be telling the truth.

Exactly. As stated in Yes Minister, 'under consideration' means 'we've lost the file.

'Under active consideration' means 'we're looking for it'.

trisontana

I just wish that some of these ministers would get stung by these PPC low-lifes. I bet they would spring into action then. That's what happened when Betty Boothroyd was clamped a few years ago.

Carthesis

DollyDee wrote: »

Oooooh, what does it say?

The ICO complaint?

It's bloody useless. Basically told me that there was no absolute right to having data deleted under the DPA (when i was expressly requesting confirmation they had deleted it following a successful appeal, thus they no longer have any need to hold or process); and that I'd need to provide evidence of my communication with G24 (despite me telling them it was emailed through their website which provided bo confirmation) etc. etc.

Despite me telling them all this in advance.

It's basically the same story as writing to DVLA - they just fob you off with official-sounding words and hope you leave them alone because they don't really want to have to do any proper work.

Chocolate fireguards.

System

I wouldn't worry about it. They do actually pay attention but don't want to rock the [paying] boat.

The ICO actually audits the DVLA and they have picked up on these issues with recommendations. So like Tesco, every little helps.

Giving your MP a bollocking about this helps too - same idea.

Carthesis

Another ICO response.

Thank you for your correspondence regarding G24.

As previously advised, there is no automatic right to deletion of your data.

There may be auditing reasons for G24 holding certain data, and they would hold this in-line with their retention policy. You may wish to ask G24 what their retention period is.

With regards to looking at this matter further you would need to raise your concerns with the organisation initially, and allow them the opportunity in which to respond.

The address you would need to write to is available on their website, and is as follows:

G24 Limited
Batchworth House
Batchworth Place
Church Street
Rickmansworth
WD3 1JE

We are sorry that we can be of no further assistance at this stage.

Yours sincerely

Sarah Timperley - Case Officer
Information Commissioner's Office

Absolutely f***ing useless.

When I get five minutes later on, I'm going to be letting Gill Furniss MP know about this as well.