Received Final demand Total Parking Solutions

Fruitcake

I've only had a quick look, but I think the preamble is a bit flowery and not particularly concise, but I think you have the main points there.

You just need to make sure that it goes to the right people and will actually be seen.

Underline or otherwise highlight the word "must" wherever it appears, and state that the PPC has failed to do this.
Include the screen grab showing that the initial appeal was submitted and acknowledged.

Don't "consider" contacting your MP. Tell them you are are going to do it.

Point out the words used by MPs about the unregulated parking industry, especially the comments about the BPA, and ask them how they intend to change the perception of MPs and the motoring public with regards to rogue parking companies such as this one.

Please do complain to your MP.

These are some of the comments made by the MPs in Parliament concerning the unregulated parking industry (Feb 2018):

https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2018-02-02/debates/CC84AF5E-AC6E-4E14-81B1-066E6A892807/Parking(CodeOfPractice)Bill

''Rip-offs from car park Cowboys must stop''; unfair treatment; signage deliberately confusing to ensure a PCN is issued; ''years of abuse by rogue parking companies''; bloodsuckers; ''the current system of regulation is hopeless, like putting Dracula in charge of the blood-bank''; extortionate fines; rogue operators; ''sense of injustice''; unfair charges and notices; wilfully misleading; signage is a deliberate act to deceive or mislead; ''confusing signs are often deliberate, to trap innocent drivers''; unreasonable; a curse; harassing; operating in a disgusting way; appeals service is no guarantee of a fair hearing; loathed; outrageous scam; dodgy practice; outrageous abuse; unscrupulous practices; ''the British Parking Association is as much use as a multi-storey car park in the Gobi desert''; and finally, by way of unanimous conclusion: ''we need to crack down on these rogue companies. They are an absolute disgrace to this country. Ordinary motorists and ordinary residents should not have to put up with this''.

These are the exact words used, so you should quote them to your MP in a complaint and ask him/her to contact Sir Greg Knight MP if he wants further information about this scam.

The_Deep

This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of contracts for alleged parking offences.

Parking Eye, Smart and a smaller company have already been named and shamed, as has Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (who take hundreds of these cases to court, and nearly always lose), who have also been reported to the regulatory authority.

The problem has become so rampant that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers. Watch the video of the Second Reading in the HofC recently.

http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41

and complain in the most robust terms to your MP. With a fair wind most of these companies may well be put out of business by Christmas.

Adrian1999

I have received a reply through the 'black hole' general email to my unsupported email.
A key point of their response intrigued me;

We are unable to prove if any mail has been received or not by either party unless sent by recorded delivery.

Recorded delivery and appeals submitted online? no email has been received by the PPC, the confirmation screen upon appeal submission lacks any form of referencing material, PCN number or date.

Here is my altered email:

To whom it may concern,

The following complaint has been disseminated between the DVLA, the BPA and the respective Private Parking Company (PPC).

The keeper of the vehicle received this purported 'parking charge'. The complaint is in regards to the Parking Charge Notice (PCN): #######, which transpired on the DD/MM/YYYY and the appeal was submitted on the DD/MM/YYYY.

The PPC Total Parking Solutions (otherwise TPS), of which they have appeared to breach!their code of practice set out by the British Parking Association (BPA) when enforcing an appeal.

The appeal was submitted within 14 days as outlined in the first Parking Charge Notice letter. The initial appeal has appeared to go without acknowledgement let alone a form of rejection. Resulting in further PCNs and a final demand notice being received. There is evidence of the appeal in the form of an!electronic print screen of the confirmation message after the point of appeal submission (find attached).

The print screen is of the confirmatory page after the submission of the appeal. This shows the lack of referencing material, PCN number or date of the confirmation to its respective appeal; or any form of "recorded delivered" correspondence between TPS and the keeper. A requirement outlined in a previous communication with BPA.

This is another reflection of the remarks made by the minister of parliament Sir Greg Knight, "Appeals service is no guarantee of a fair hearing; loathed; outrageous scam; dodgy practice; outrageous abuse; unscrupulous practices". A segment of not only his but a on going dialogue in tackling and disbanding PPC businesses such as Total Parking Solutions as result of their "cowboy" practices that lack any form of adequate regulation posed by the British Parking Association.

There has been no receipt of acknowledgement to the keeper was received, as required by Section B standard 22.8 of the BPA Approved Operator Scheme Code of Practice. A requirement of acknowledgement includes the failure to respond with the rejection of the original appeal. These actions infringe BPA standards of operator standards;

22.4 If a driver or keeper appeals a parking charge you must review the case and decide whether to: uphold the parking charge and explain why it was issued and should therefore be paid, or reduce or cancel the charge and take no further management action other than informing the driver.

22.6 When you receive a appeal about the issue of a parking charge, you must stop work on processing the charge immediately. You must not increase the charge until you have replied to the appeal.

22.8 You must acknowledge or reply to the appeal within 14 days of receiving it. If at first you only acknowledge the appeal, or your reply does not fully resolve it, normally we would expect you to seek the additional information you require from the motorist and accept or reject the appeal in writing not more than 35 days after the information required to resolve it has been received from the motorist. It is acknowledged that in exceptional circumstances, an investigation into a appeal may take longer than 35 days after such information has been received and in these instances the motorist must be advised accordingly and given a date by which they can expect a resolution. If this date cannot be achieved then the motorist must be written to again and a revised resolution date agreed. We may require you to demonstrate that you are keeping to these times.

22.12 If you reject an appeal you must: tell the motorist how to make an appeal to IAS. This includes providing a template notice of appeal form or a link to the appropriate website for lodging an appeal and a valid 10-digit verification code. Even if the verification code is automatically printed on an enclosed appeal form, it must still be in a prominent position on the first page of the rejection letter. give the motorist a reasonable amount of time to pay the charge before restarting the collection process. We recommend that you allow at least 35 days from the date you rejected the challenge.

If the respective appeal was rejected a POPLA code was not supplied to further challenge the issue.

This appeal will be raised with the keepers local MP, union representative, and the client landowner of whom the PPC is accountable to. The current dialogue in the house of commons of the poor practice of PPCs and its regulating body the BPA will be stressed upon in the subsequent communication.


Sincerely,

One key change I have included is the removal of wording that indicates my own involvement. Instead I have portrayed it was best as, "the keeper". Is this appropriate?

Any other thoughts would be very welcome.

Many thanks


P.S - I have tried my best to removal text errors that have appeared through pasting from a mac based program, apologises.

Coupon-mad

As long as you attach the letters/screenshot proving appeal/acknowledgement, then the BPA should investigate. But that email looks too long, the fact that you received no POPLA code is lost among the wordiness!

Adrian1999

Okay, I will trim it down, make a more focusing point towards the POPLA.

I do have one doubt which is in regards to my print screen of the appeal confirmation. As I said, there is no referencing detail or PCN code on the print screen, which I feel is done intentionally.

Adrian1999

Apparently, the email correspondence submitted with the appeal may be incorrect, as presented in a response by the PPC. A screenshot has been provided with an 'appeal response' to the keeper at an incorrect email address.

Advice on how to proceed?

Coupon-mad

What do you mean? Don't understand.

Adrian1999

The email that the Parking enforcer has for correspondence of the appeal is wrong. They have sent a response to an invalid email.

KeithP

You're still not explaining it well.

Whose email address is wrong?

Have the PPC given you an invalid email address to send your appeal to?

Are you sending to the PPCs wrong address?

Are the PPC not responding to your correct email address?

Coupon-mad

Did you make a typo when appealing online and inputting the email addy? Or did they?