PPC Incompetence and potential breach of DPA - what to do next?

eclectic_cornflakes

Hi. Can I have some guidance on how to proceed with this please?

A short summary: just over a month ago I drove my wife's car to my local railway station, parked and paid via an App - which is what I always do, and the signed T&Cs make it clear is acceptable.

I was ticketed anyway (PCN on windscreen, for failure to display a ticket). So I "appealed" via email and after a couple of weeks received an email confirming (somewhat grudgingly) that the PCN had been cancelled.

Yesterday my wife received an NTK letter from another company "acting on behalf of" the original PPC (whose logo was all over the letter) with the same PCN details demanding 50% more than the original undiscounted charge. There was no explanation for the increase.

I am - as you'd expect - seething about this, having had our time wasted and not once but twice (and personal data extracted from the DVLA) for no good reason, and being a victim of a clear breach of the PPC's accuracy obligations under the Data Protection Act.

I've drafted a letter to the PPC concerned setting out the sequence of events and requesting
- full disclosure of my personal data from their systems and those of any companies they have sent my data to
- immediate deletion of my wife's personal data from their systems and those of any other companies etc. etc.
- an apology
- £250 compensation for inconvenience and distress (particularly the threat in the NTK letter to clamp / remove the car if I continue to park there, as I use the station regularly; naturally I have lost all confidence in their ability to maintain accurate data about the car's status). I've cited the two cases referenced in the DPA thread here.

I'm planning to ask for satisfaction within 2 weeks otherwise I'll report the matter to the BPA (they are members), the DVLA (their KADOE contract has probably been breached) and the station operator, and reserve the right to take court action.

I might also add in a line about being prepared to publish details that would benefit anyone seeking evidence that their systems aren't fit for purpose (ie anyone fighting a PCN from them - I'm not revealing further details about the PPC at this stage to keep my powder dry on that).

What do people think? Am I being too easy on them, or making unreasonable demands? Anything I should add to or cut from the letter?

I don't want to waste more time pursing a lost cause but if there's a way to make them think twice before attempting extortion again in this way I'd like to follow it up. Of course mistakes happen... but if human error is rarely a successful mitigating factor in PPC appeals I think that should cut both ways.

Thanks.

PS On the KADOE contact point I wondered whether the two separate but related companies thing (PCN issued by company A who passes details to company B to get keeper details) is a devious way of protecting them both - company B can claim it was acting in good faith on the instructions of company A who isn't a party to the KADOE contract. Any thoughts on this?

beamerguy

Is this letter from the idiots at DRP ???

Umkomaas

Which two PPCs? Who is acting on whose behalf? Don’t think I’ve heard this scenario previously.

pappa_golf

railway station , bylaws ,

PS On the KADOE contact point I wondered whether the two separate but related companies thing (PCN issued by company A who passes details to company B to get keeper details) is a devious way of protecting them both - company B can claim it was acting in good faith on the instructions of company A who isn't a party to the KADOE contract. Any thoughts on this?


please can you name the 2 companies involved , as this may be different than a normal parking case

eclectic_cornflakes

Original PPC is CP Plus. NTK came from "Parking Collection Services on behalf of our client CP Plus Ltd".
The NTK letter (which I've just re-read) says Penalty (not Parking Charge) and it references (but does not quote from) section 219 of the Transport Act 2000 as amended by the Railways Act 2005 - I'll have to google those later.

fisherjim

Parking Collection Services are debt collectors, so it would appear that CP Plus have not called off their tame muppets!

You should complain to everyone possible about this blatent harassment!

As it was a railway station car park it will come under bye-laws, however a PPC cannot actually take you to court over it anyway!