Indigo PCN - driver named

Chelsea-d

Hi I am new to this so apologies in advance. I received a PCN from Indigo having parked at a station car park.
Unfortunately and naively, I appealed believing I would get a fair hearing. Not so, as I have come to realise having found this web site and various threads.

Reading the threads, I have realised I inadvertently revealed the name of the driver as part of the appeal to Indigo. I now know I should not have done so!

But my question is will it only matter if they decide to take me to a Magistrates Court? Further, and I am confused here, can Indigo take to me the MC or does it have to be the TOC?

Thanks

System

This should be in your own thread but it bares keeping separate so that others understand.

It has to be TOC. And even then the numbers of cases by TOC's are very low.

Magistrates are loathed to consider criminal charges for essentially innocent mistakes. Also the burden of proof in criminal cases is significantly higher than in County Court.

Basically lying to motorists is cheaper. And with regards to lying, check out the owner of ZZPS and what the Financial Conduct Authority has said.

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, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors.

Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, and another company have already been named and shamed, as has Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each year). They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

Hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned.

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.
and complain in the most robust terms to your MP. With a fair wind they will be out of business by Christmas.

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

Chelsea-d

Thanks for your replies. I looked up ZZPS as suggested. Couldn't find them or the owner of the FCA website, but found this:
PADI.zendesk website (can't post link as I am too new).

Interestingly we have just received an exact copy of the ZZPS letter (which is near the bottom of the above web-site page, under the title Another misleading letter). I shall be contacting Trading Standards as advised.

Fruitcake

I'm assuming you didn't get a PoPLA code. You should complain to the BPA and DVLA that Indigo have denied you the right to an independent appeal, which is yours by right as detailed in the Alternative Dispute Regulations Act 2015.
The UK Government says you have access to ADR by Act of Parliament, so you want to know why an unregulated parking company has denied you this right.

Please also complain to your MP.

Ask Indigo the same question, and keep playing ping-pong by snail mail until six months have passed.
Ask a different question each time, every few weeks.
Do byelaws apply.
Which byelaw.
What part of the byelaws apply.

Chelsea-d

You are correct, I did not get a POPLA code. The letter
says:
You have now reached the end of our internal appeals procedure.
As per an announcement by BPA on 20 Sept 2017 it is no longer a requirement for Indigo to offer an independent appeal via POPLA.

I checked this with POPLA who confirmed they had a backlog of cases pending a further review by govt associated with Railway Byelaws.
Thank you for your further advice which I shall take up.

System

As per an announcement by BPA on 20 Sept 2017 it is no longer a requirement for Indigo to offer an independent appeal via POPLA.

This means it is a "penalty" and not a parking charge. It will time out after 6 months so you can sit on your hands until then - and then complain.

Chelsea-d

Hi thanks for the advice so far.

We have now received the first letter from QDR solicitors acting o behalf of ZZPS. They do not mention taking us to Court but at present ask us to pay the Penalty Notice.

I intend at this stage to do nothing.

Fruitcake

Chelsea-d wrote: »

Hi thanks for the advice so far.

We have now received the first letter from QDR solicitors acting o behalf of ZZPS. They do not mention taking us to Court but at present ask us to pay the Penalty Notice.

I intend at this stage to do nothing.

What happened when you complained to the BPA, DVLA, and your MP about not being given access to ADR as advised?

beamerguy

Chelsea-d wrote: »

Hi thanks for the advice so far.

We have now received the first letter from QDR solicitors acting o behalf of ZZPS. They do not mention taking us to Court but at present ask us to pay the Penalty Notice.

I intend at this stage to do nothing.

Why do QDR say they are acting on behalf of ZZPS ??

ZZPS are only debt collectors (part of the Wright Hassall
group as are QDR)
ZZPS did not issue a ticket, Indigo did ??

You should be asking for a copy of the ZZPS parking ticket ?

Coupon-mad

IamEmanresu wrote: »

This means it is a "penalty" and not a parking charge.

It will time out after 6 months so you can sit on your hands until then - and then complain.

As above.

The first letter you get that arrives after the 6 months is up, is time to rachet up the complaints to the BPA, DVLA, your MP and the ICO, saying that Indigo only have a contract to issue (toothless) 'pre-action' letters. Nothing more and nothing less.

So if they write after the 6 months has timed out (when there can be no ''pre-action'' or ''action'' at all) then they are demanding money using deception, IMHO, and misusing data only supplied by the DVLA for the single purpose allowed.

That is very much contrary to the GDPR, and a matter the ICO should take an interest in.

Which was to issue pre-action letters (yawny yawn...) in accordance with their Govia/Thameslink contract, which by definition cannot allow data processing or storing beyond the statutory six months the TOC has, to lay a case before Mags.