Myparkingcharge.co.uk

pappa_golf

millerose wrote: »

Yes will do.

totally deficient in many ways


mind you that ticket would be compliant to the IPC , but would make a judge laugh

Coupon-mad

Posts about how to complain to the DVLA about this scam here:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=110710

Look at page two, post #25, I post as SchoolRunMum over there and this is my view:


That is a notice placed on the windscreen giving NOTICE to the DRIVER to refer to the website which gives that driver the photos and details and 'offers' appeal. That is a NTD, can't be called anything else! As you say, a bad one. If the DVLA twist this to be anything less than a 'NTD' (of sorts) then IMHO they really are unfit for purpose in their responsibility to protect data of keepers.

There is no excuse over four years after Schedule 4 came in, for a firm sloshing in other people's money to be unable to understand the 28 day period, unable to wait the requisite 28 days after any NTD, before obtaining the data under the KADOE contract and unable to come up with a POFA compliant NTK when they've clearly made a special effort to attempt it (bless)...

Amusing to note - as well as the fact they had no right to the keeper's data yet - the NTK has the 28 day period wrong and apparently (a Freudian slip) VCS have obtained the data for the purpose of 'PURSING' the driver = ? opening their purse so VCS they can trouser the money?!

EVERYONE NEEDS TO WAIT TILL THEY GET THEIR NOTICE TO KEEPER, SENT TOO SOON, THEN:

Complain immediately to David Dunford at the DVLA about what VCS are doing then this would be ripe for a DPA claim;

david.dunford@dvla.gsi.gov.uk

You would be pointing out as keeper that:

- You are the registered keeper and this is a serious complaint.

- The complaint is about (a) the DVLA issuing data to VCS too early without reasonable cause and (b) about VCS claiming 'keeper liability' when this cannot possibly be the case.

- the Driver found a Notice on the windscreen.

- the Driver has not been identified and will not be.

- the Notice to Driver was very basic, clearly not POFA compliant but directed the driver to a website which offers the driver an appeal.

- The driver had no chance to appeal but then, within days:

- VCS then issued a NTK following the placement of the (basic but very clearly something that can only be described as an) 'on-screen' NTD, which means they obtained the DVLA data far too soon, a very serious breach of their KADOE agreement.

- that NTK tells the keeper they are liable, gets the 28 day period wrong and was clearly not issued within the 'relevant period' (indisputably, the relevant period is day 29 - day 56 where any Notice is placed on-screen).

- Remind the DVLA that in 2012, parking firms were banned for 3 months for stating that a keeper was liable when they could not be.

- Ask what more VCS have to do before they are banned (the DVLA will not answer that but I'd ask it anyway).

- Ask for a substantive reply within 14 days because VCS have wrongly stated the keeper is liable within the wrong 28 day period and no doubt will be gearing up for pretending they can assume the keeper was the driver and suing the recipient. This despite having obtained the data outside of the KADOE timeline with such undue haste and disregard for the right of the driver to appeal that this is clearly an unfair business practice and breach of the DPA and the DVLA must be seen to stamp out such practices.

- Finish by saying that the DVLA's replies after investigations will be collated and copied to Marcus Jones of the DCLG and to the Information Commissioner in due course.

As the IPC do not allow mere mortals to email simple complaints and require people to register their entire data and shoe size and give them the shirt off your back, just to make a complaint about an AOS firm, you should finish by stating you have been unable to complain to the IPC because they are no more entitled to your data as keeper, than VCS are, yet the IPC website demands significant data, even for a complaint.

pappa_golf

Ps myparkingcharge.co.uk are not in an ATA and (should) be reported to the police for trying to obtain monies

marcinoza

Hi guys!
I got exactly same parking charge on 31/1/17 and today 7/2/17 I got a letter from them.
So it looks like they have access to registered keeper details from DVLA,
Do you think I can still ignore it?
cos my wife is registered keeper and the letter is on her name.
And she is panicking but I was driving that day.
Should I pay it or ignore it?
thanks
ps. I tried to post picture of letter received, but I'm a new user and I'm not allowed ;(

Coupon-mad

Should I pay it or ignore it?

Neither, why are you thinking they are the options? That's not what the sticky thread says:

'NEWBIES PLEASE READ THESE FAQS FIRST'.

leenumber10

marcinoza wrote: »

Hi guys!
I got exactly same parking charge on 31/1/17 and today 7/2/17 I got a letter from them.
So it looks like they have access to registered keeper details from DVLA,
Do you think I can still ignore it?
cos my wife is registered keeper and the letter is on her name.
And she is panicking but I was driving that day.
Should I pay it or ignore it?
thanks
ps. I tried to post picture of letter received, but I'm a new user and I'm not allowed ;(

What's the latest on this one and what did you decide to do?

Coupon-mad

Hopefully he read the NEWBIES thread and did what everyone else does here.

twhitehousescat

leenumber10 wrote: »

What's the latest on this one and what did you decide to do?

folded it in half and put it under a table leg

marcinoza

I decided to make paper plane lol, I was speaking to my friend who's working as a driver and he got many parking charges from private companies before and never paid for it. I think, I will only pay that if I'll get a letter from court. I think those companies are targeted to scam more people rather than fight against them in court.

Coupon-mad

marcinoza wrote: »

I decided to make paper plane lol, I was speaking to my friend who's working as a driver and he got many parking charges from private companies before and never paid for it. I think, I will only pay that if I'll get a letter from court. I think those companies are targeted to scam more people rather than fight against them in court.

Your friend is misinformed. VCS and Excel sue the pants off people. We have hundreds of VCS claims here being defended (and being won, not lost).

Come back when you have a court claim to defend like Lamilad did (and won) against Excel today. You don't PAY if you get a court claim, you defend. Nor do you throw the letters in the bin. That pseudo PCN would have been useful evidence.