PCN from A S Parking at Promenade Perranporth

ImNoExpert

Hi Alpetrum,

Just be aware A S Parking will hand the keeper details to Debt Recovery Plus (DRP), who will send the keeper letters demanding more money, basically asking the keeper to pay what A S Parking claim is owed, plus money for themselves (likely £150).

General advice here is to ignore DRP letters, as written about in post 4 of the Newbies thread, as they themselves can't take you to court, although personally I would consider sending DRP a subject access request which they now must respond to for free and within, I think, 30 days.

Also send a subject access request to the DVLA (SubjectAccess.Requests@dvla.gsi.gov.uk), asking who has requested keeper details, when the request was made, and why it was authorised.

Coupon-mad

personally I would consider sending DRP a subject access request which they now must respond to for free and within, I think, 30 days.

Also send a subject access request to the DVLA (SubjectAccess.Requests@dvla.gsi.gov.uk), asking who has requested keeper details, when the request was made, and why it was authorised.

Seems somewhat pointless and the wrong recipients for the SAR.

I've only ever seen deluded advice to contact debt collectors, spouted by someone who just wanted to make money from it.

What do you think about the TrustPilot reviews posted on this forum, ImNoExpert?

ImNoExpert

Why would you consider a SAR to the DVLA and a debt collection agency pointless Coupon-mad? Some people (like myself) are interested in what information any organisation may be holding about them, not just a PPC, and more so about how they came to be in possession of said information, and why they feel they have the right to retain and process said data.

The handling of one's data, and subsequently, the incorrect handling of ones data, is something I happen to think it worth being fully aware of and worth giving a toss about, where at all possible. A SAR to the DVLA can ascertain who asked for keeper details, what reason they gave for asking, and when they asked, allowing a keeper to know for sure which organisation made the request, whether they did so within the allowed time frame, and in the case of multiple PCN's, if each PCN was requested individually.

Same with a collections firm, a SAR aims to ascertain where they obtained keeper details from, why they have it, under who's instruction, why the PCN amount differs from the amount they are now asking, and what other information they may have obtained without you realising.

By making money from it, I assume you mean in a case of information mishandling, where someone may then want to challenge and potentially claim against said data mishandling? Can't say I see anything wrong with challenging data mishandling, but then maybe that's just me

After my SAR to DRP, I stopped hearing from them, though whether that was because of the SAR, or because they had already hit some form of "try twice give up" target, I don't know. Some two years later, nothing from A S Parking either. A SAR to all concerted might be enough to deter any PPC from proceeding to hound you further, but that's just an opinion.

I'm not entirely sure what nerve of yours I've hit, but I wasn't attempting to spout anything, neither do I consider what I said deluded, like anybody else I had an opinion, and that's all it ever will be.

I don't know what you mean regarding TrustPilot reviews posted on this forum. Typing in "TrustPilot" in the search box shows posts that contain the term "TrustPilot", as expected, but nothing meaningful to me, and searching "MoneySavingExpert" on TrustPilot shows me a three star average rating for MSE!

Coupon-mad

By making money from it, I assume you mean in a case of information mishandling, where someone may then want to challenge and potentially claim against said data mishandling?

No, I don't mean that.

I mean there are people whose agenda is to pointlessly extract money from people for a service they don't need, such as pointlessly writing to debt collectors.