HELP - parking fine at hospital I work at

Redx

in which case follow that same path and adapt what they used, hopefully with a discontinuance like happened to them

well done to Umkomaas for finding it and posting the link

Umkomaas

contact the DPO at the DVLA and find out when your details were accessed, if at all, and check how long after the incident date this happened

DVLA SUBJECT ACCESS REQUESTS

You should email the DVLA and ask which organisations (and for what reason) accessed the registered keeper's data from them between a range of dates which includes the date(s) of the parking incident(s). You need to provide the registered keeper's full name and address, the address on the V5C logbook and the Vehicle Registration Mark of the vehicle involved in the parking incident.

SubjectAccess.Requests@dvla.gov.uk

Even though you email your request, the DVLA will respond via Royal Mail.

Shadk

Am I able to post my defence here for review and critique?

twhitehousescat

Umkomaas wrote: »

DVLA SUBJECT ACCESS REQUESTS

You should email the DVLA and ask which organisations (and for what reason) accessed the registered keeper's data from them between a range of dates which includes the date(s) of the parking incident(s). You need to provide the registered keeper's full name and address, the address on the V5C logbook and the Vehicle Registration Mark of the vehicle involved in the parking incident.

SubjectAccess.Requests@dvla.gov.uk

Even though you email your request, the DVLA will respond via Royal Mail.

oxford hospital have never claimed to be a member of BPA/IPC and do not have to adhere to codes .

they will not have used KADOE principal or used v888/3 (as a parking Co) , they will have used here ability as a hospital or tregs will have got data acting as solisitors

nosferatu1001

Yes, of coruse post your defence here. Everyone does!

Shadk

1. I am XXXXXX the defendant in this matter.

2. For the avoidance of doubts, the defendant is the registered keeper of the vehicle, registration XXXXXXX

3. The defendant denies all allegations of breach of contract set out by the claimant in the particulars of claim.

4. The defendant was a full time Employee of XXXXXXX , and had purchased a staff parking permit which was valid on all dates. The Vehicle was parked appropriately in designated staff car parks, with the parking permit visibly displayed in the front window of the vehicle on both occasions.

5. The particulars of claim submitted by the claimant is profoundly lacking in detail regarding the alleged breaches of contract. The only information provided are two identical statements claiming breach of ‘Condition 1’, which was clearly copy and pasted, and there is no clarification on how the conditions were breached. As such, the defendant believes the particulars of claim are not compliant with the Civil Procedure Rules 16.4, and therefore unfairly limits the ability of the defendant to provide a comprehensive defence statement.

6. As an unrepresented litigant-in-person, the defendant respectfully asks the court for permission to amend and/or supplement this defence statement, should the claimant provide further detail to the particulars of claim.

7. To address the allegations of breaching ‘Condition 1, Vehicle not parked wholly in marked bay, parked in restricted or prohibited area (e.g. on double yellow and red line, a verge, fire route, footway or traffic island) or causing an obstruction’:

7.1. The vehicle was parked in staff car parks in an appropriate manner both occasions, but not in a marked bay as there were no markings on the ground. The contract the defendant signed with the claimant on purchasing the parking permit acknowledges that some car parks are not marked with the following statement: ‘1. Parking or waiting must be in authorised areas only and wholly within a marked bay or such an area reserved for parking, as it is recognised some staff car parks are unmarked due to having a temporary surface.’
7.2. The vehicle was not parked in restricted or prohibited areas on either occasions, such as on double yellow and red line, a verge, fire route, footway or traffic island as listed by the claimant.
7.3. The vehicle was not causing an obstruction on either occasions.
7.4. The claimant claims that terms and conditions were ‘prominently displayed’ on the premises. However, the only signs that the defendant saw in the car parks declare that the area is designated for staff parking, and parking is allowed with a valid permit, which the defendant possessed.

8. To address the allegations of breaching ‘Condition 4’, Vehicle parked in a space designated for registered disabled ‘blue badge’ holder but a valid ‘blue badge’ not displayed:

8.1 The claimant claims that terms and conditions were ‘prominently displayed’ on the premises. However, photographic evidence (attached) shows the signage on the disabled bays to be almost completely obliterated to beyond recognition and as such cannot be ‘prominently displayed’


9. The defendant is therefore perplexed at the reason for issuing the parking fines, especially since parking in those exact same spaces the defendant had parked on those dates is not only permitted to staff members with a parking permit, but is also frequently parked by other motorists. The defendant is able to produce photographic proof of other vehicles parking in the same spaces at approximately the same time of day that the fines were issued, without receiving a parking ticket.

10. In addition to the original parking charge, for which liability is denied, the claimant has artificially inflated the value of the claim by adding purported legal representative’s costs of £50, which have not actually been incurred by the claimant.

11. In summary, it is the defendant’s position that the claim discloses no cause of action, is without merit and has no real prospect of success.

I believe all the facts contained in this defence are true.

The_Deep

10. In addition … the claimant has artificially inflated the value of the claim by adding purported legal representative’s costs of £50,which have not actually been incurred by the claimant.

I hope that you have raised this matter with the SRA.

http://www.sra.org.uk/home/home.page

and complained to your MP.

Shadk

SRA I will do now

I meet with chairman of the trust and MP in the new year so will certainly be raising all these issues.

I wonder how many other staff are going through this - a number I’d wager

Shadk

Sending my defence on Monday

Any last minute changes you’d recommend?
Thanks

Fruitcake

Shadk wrote: »

SRA I will do now

I meet with chairman of the trust and MP in the new year so will certainly be raising all these issues.

I wonder how many other staff are going through this - a number I’d wager

It might help if you had a few job adverts/applications lying around, or better still a job offer, to show them how damaging the actions of their agents is.
Also print off the comments made by our MPs to show what all parties agree about this unregulated scam.

Are you a member of a Trade Union? If so, your union rep should be deeply involved with this.