Forum WIN ,POFA help.now DPA claim

Redx

coupon-mad already told you to complain to the BPA and the DVLA about some of the paperwork

so do the same again , with unredacted copies of ALL paperwork , complaining that they have both breached the BPA CoP by not offering a POPLA code , plus the inflated charge whilst this is at appeal section and not with the debt collectors which happens much later in the process

do not name the driver at all, to anybody , at any time

Topcat_147

I have already complained to BPA and DVLA about the original PCN and NTK. No replies received.


Will draft complaints to both again about no Popla code and inflated charge. Will post draft here.


Do I respond to TNC and advise that not "correct person"? Noticed in this letter they do not refer to Registered Keeper only Owner or driver.

Topcat_147

First draft of complaint to BPA with copy to DVLA your comments would be more than welcome

BPA

Dear Sir,

The keeper wish's to make a formal complaint about two of your member’s and their compliance with your Code of practice.

Autosec apparently issued a PCN …….. on …….. via a windscreen ticket. The first the keeper knew of this was when they received an NTK from TNC Parking Services dated …….. this showed an amount of £100 . As Instructed by TNC An appeal was posted to Auto sec on xxx/01/17

The NTK sent by TNC does not comply with the terms of POFA 2012

The NTK was sent xx days after the issue date of the PCN, outside the 56 days

The NTK does not warn the keeper, that if they do not know the driver details and an address they will hold the keeper liable to pay

Today the keeper received a 2nd letter from TNC Parking Services. It states that driver has ignored all of their client,s correspondence and that the driver must now pay £xxx.

Having received this letter from TNC only xx days after the appeal was posted to Autosec ,it can only assume Autosec have rejected my appeal.

The Keeper has not received any correspondence from Autosec informing them of the appeal result and or a POPLA code.

A compliant Notice to Keeper was never served - no Keeper Liability can apply.

This operator has not fulfilled the 'second condition' for keeper liability as defined in Schedule 4 and as a result, they have no lawful authority to pursue any parking charge from myself, as a registered keeper appellant. There is no discretion on this matter. If Schedule 4 mandatory documents are not served at all, or in time (or if the document omits any prescribed wording) then keeper liability simply does not apply.

The wording in the Protection of Freedoms Act (POFA) 2012 is as follows:

''Right to claim unpaid parking charges from keeper of vehicle:
4(1) The creditor has the right to recover any unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the vehicle. (2) The right under this paragraph applies only if

(a) the conditions specified in paragraphs 5, 6*, 11 and 12 (so far as applicable) are met;

*Conditions that must be met for purposes of paragraph 4:
6(1) ''The second condition is that the creditor (or a person acting for or on behalf of the creditor)— (a)has given a notice to driver in accordance with paragraph 7, followed by a notice to keeper in accordance with paragraph 8. This is re-iterated further ‘If a notice to driver has been given, any subsequent notice to keeper MUST be given in accordance with paragraph 8.’



The NTK must have been delivered to the registered keeper’s address within the ‘relevant period’ which is highlighted as a total of 56 days beginning with the day after that on which any notice to driver was given. As this operator has evidently failed to serve a NTK, not only have they chosen to flout the strict requirements set out in PoFA 2012, but they have consequently failed to meet the second condition for keeper liability


AUTOSEC

The keeper complains that Autosec are not complying with your COP. you are referred to their website page, para 4 “in your appeal you must provide the drivers full name and address” and “Appeals submitted without all the requested details cannot be processed”

They are categorically not allowed to insist on the driver's details in an appeal

They have not offered a POPLA code

They are not conforming to POFA 2012

The keeper can only assume that Autosec have refused my appeal because they did not give the driver details. This would be confirmed by the fact they have instructed TNC to contact the keeper again today.


TNC Parking Services.

The keeper complains that TNC are in breach of the COP because

They are not conforming to POFA 2012

They are sending out bully/ threating letters with inflated charges within the 35 day period, stated in the COP for operators to deal with Appeals.


Please note that any breach of the Code of Practice the PPC is signed up to, breaches the KADOE contract to get DVLA data.

This misuse of my data was not only unfair and unwarranted at the point that it was shared but in fact the conduct was specifically contrary to the BPA Code of Practice (CoP). This requires accredited operators to cease all work in relation to pursuing charges, whilst an appeal is in hand. Further, under the KADOE rules - which they must adhere to when processing DVLA data - operators must fully comply with the BPA CoP when handling any keeper data. They have failed to do so, causing me significant harassment and distress

Please note a copy of this complaint has been copied to the DVLA

Topcat_147

Any comments on the above complaint before I send please

Topcat_147

Any comments on the above complaint before I send please

Topcat_147

Had a reply from BPA within 24 hrs. Do I just scan all the paper work and email it back to them?


Dear xxxx,

Thank you for your email.

Please provide evidence of the breaches you have advised of in your email below.

If we receive evidence of a possible breach of a point raised in the BPA Code of Practice, we will carry out an investigation and request further information from the parking operator concerned. The operator will be required to deal with any issued raised during our investigation, and to provide satisfactory evidence of this having been done.

Once the information is received we will be able to advise you further.

Yours Sincerely,

Esme Berry
AOS Investigations Team
British Parking Association
Email: <a href="mailto:aos@britishparking.co.uk" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">[EMAIL="aos&#64;britishparking.co.uk"]aos@britishparking.co.uk[/EMAIL]

Guys_Dad

Send them a copy of the NtK, reiterating once again where the NtK is not POFA compliant.

Topcat_147

So this is what I am sending BPA after their request for evidence. Any comments




Complaint against Autosec and TNC Parking

I refer to your email reply of and your request for evidence. I attach 4 photographs.

1st photo shows a copy of the NTK from TNC Parking services dated 21/12 2016

2nd photo shows the keepers appeal letter to Autosec dated 9/01/17

3rd photo shows, Post Office proof of posting of the keepers appeal to Autosec dated 9/01/17

4th photo shows 2nd TNC Parking Service letter, requesting inflated charge dated 18/01/17.

The full details of my complaint were contained in my email to you of 26/01/17 and I do not intend to repeat those details again in this email.

However I do wish to remind you that.


I am also making the DVLA aware of this complaint. You are responsible for ensuring your members adhere to your code. I quote

“In order to help ensure motorists are treated fairly when any parking charge is pursued, DVLA will only provide vehicle keeper details where the car parking management company is a member of an Accredited Trade Association (ATA)

The ATA’s enforce a code of practice which covers many aspects of a car parking operators business, and while compliance with the code of practice is a key consideration for DVLA when releasing Vehicle Keeper Data, not all requirements of the code affect reasonable cause.

DVLA will not disclose data to parking companies who are not members of an ATA and looks primarily to the ATA’s to monitor adherence to the code of practice and explore and address non-compliance when it arises.”


And I also remind you of the instructions the BPA gave to their membership after being told to do so by the DVLA. This is what they said:
“the following practices may be considered as Code breaches and must not be continued:
• Asking the motorist to enter into additional correspondence to obtain a POPLA code
• Failing to include a correct and/or valid POPLA Code within the Rejection correspondence
• Issuing a POPLA Code with a date identifier which is significantly different from the date of rejection
• Appearing to indicate that the issue of a POPLA Code is conditional on driver details being supplied “

I Particularly reminder you that you should very carefully read the first sentence, which clearly shows that this is happening in this case and is very much a breach of the Code of Practice and needs to be investigated.

This misuse of my data was not only unfair and unwarranted at the point that it was shared but in fact, the conduct was specifically contrary to the BPA Code of Practice (CoP). This requires accredited operators to cease all work in relation to pursuing charges, whilst an appeal is in hand. Further, under the KADOE rules - which they must adhere to when processing DVLA data - operators must fully comply with the BPA CoP when handling any keeper data. They have failed to do so, causing me significant harassment and distress

I also request that you ask Autosec to supply the POPLA code they issued if they claim they have rejected the appeal together with the dates.

Yours sincerely

.

Topcat_147

bump. is it ok

Coupon-mad

Looks fine!