DVLA admit to Data Protection Act breach with regards to MIL collections

HO87

twhitehousescat wrote: »

Correct but let's not get too carried away - yet. The bulk of cases I've seen involved the use of V888/3's rather than KADOE applications. At the moment this appears to apply only to data obtained electronically.

would electronically be:

Date access granted to DVLA ANPR database: 28-02-2015

as per NWPE?

You are going to have to explain that. NWPE didn't have direct access but used DR+ to carry out their checks for them

twhitehousescat

The BPMA state that THEY have access , are they wrong? http://www.bmpa.eu/companydata/Northwest_Parking_Enforcement.html

beamerguy

Umkomaas wrote: »

Where's BG when you need him? Missed out on a 'scoop' here! Snooze and you lose!

:rotfl::rotfl:

Thank you Half_way.

That is great news so clearly this now needs media attention

HO87

twhitehousescat wrote: »

The BPMA state that THEY have access , are they wrong? http://www.bmpa.eu/companydata/Northwest_Parking_Enforcement.html

If a PPC goes direct or uses DR+, ICES or Ranger Services for example the DVLA still has to approve them.

Edit: To add to the tension, I understand there is a defended MIL claim working its way through the system involving yet another claim from the Lowther Street car park in Carlisle then managed by NWPE although management of it has since passed to (un)SmartParking.

twhitehousescat

HO87 wrote: »

If a PPC goes direct or uses DR+, ICES or Ranger Services for example the DVLA still has to approve them.

Edit: To add to the tension, I understand there is a defended MIL claim working its way through the system involving yet another claim from the Lowther Street car park in Carlisle then managed by NWPE although management of it has since passed to (un)SmartParking.

you previously said "You are going to have to explain that. NWPE didn't have direct access but used DR+ to carry out their checks for them"

I was not stating if the DVLA had to approve or not , I stated that thec BMPA says that they have "Date access granted to DVLA ANPR database: 28-02-2015"


but then it would it not be marked as many others are as "Date access granted to DVLA ANPR database: Manual requests only" if they were using the likes of DR+, ICES or Ranger Services

HO87

No. There are three means of obtaining keeper data:

1. Manually - using form V888/3
2. Using a service bureaux - like DR+, ICES etc which is electronic but is not direct (you email DR+ and they email you back)
3. Direct using what used to be called the EDL (electronic data link)

I have been surprised at how many PPC's are still using V888/3's and not even stepping up the indirect route.

twhitehousescat

either by v888/3 or electronic , they seem to be getting info from the DVLA by their own means rather than thru DR+



other companies that use the likes of DR+ are listed as:



the same applies for ICES and Ranger Services

one of the questions you posed on Parking pransters blog was "What about those PPC's who have used the V888/3 paper application route (as opposed to KADOE)? Do they escape sanction/investigation?"

the above "snip" from the latest Kadoe volumes clealy shows that they are "kadoe fee"

the stipulation on that DVLA paper are Kadoe fee , companies that can demonstrate a reasonable cause for accessing the vehicle keepers details ,

at this point they class all the listed companies under one heading "Kadoe" , so it beggers belief that they can wriggle out of admitting failure

beamerguy

For the sake of clarification to readers, what should they do if contacted by MIL
Those who have been burned by MIL, WHAT IS THEIR REDRESS NOW

beamerguy

When the Daily Mail did a big article about the DVLA, one of you guys posted the email address for the reporter

I cannot find it ???

peter_the_piper

Martin Robinson seems to be doing pieces on bus gates etc , don't know the email addy though.