Hospital BoCN, assumption of driver and threaten to take to court

twhitehousescat

KeithP wrote: »

In that excellent letter you mention that Bolton Hospital NHS Trust are not Approved Operators of either the BPA or IPC.

I wonder how the Trust managed to get keeper details from the DVLA?
Of course it's possible, but I wonder how they did it?

The NHS patient, visitor and staff car parking principles has a footnote which says:

By implication, surely the recommendation is that if the NHS Trust are 'doing their own thing', they too should be a member of one of the AOSs.

There are at least two NHS Trusts that are members of the BPA Approved Operator Scheme.

right at the very start

"their car parking attendant observed a vehicle parked at the above location on the specified date and that the vehicle, which is registered in your name,"

ie the vehicle was listed by the hospital when a permit was issued for it"

yjey also go on about parking regs on notice boards (staff??) and "The above debt arises from the written agreement which is the parking regulation as detailed on the notice boards and the date of agreement is the date the notice was issued. The parties to the agreement are you and our client "

the hospital are not in a AOS , tregs are NOT !

this case is about PARKING , the government states that the only way that any COMPANY can get info for a PRIVATE PARKING offence is by being a member of one of the AOS s

tregs do a lot of counsil type work , and do have access to DVLA records , perhaps a quick email to the DVLA asking WHO asked and for what reason for info from them , + dates

Umkomaas

tregs do a lot of counsil type work , and do have access to DVLA records , perhaps a quick email to the DVLA asking WHO asked and for what reason for info from them , + dates

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.

You want to check out, if there are 3 separate charges in the offing, whether 3 separate requests were made, or were your details held (possibly in contravention of the DPA) by either the Trust or Trethowans, and used to issue the other charges.

Also in the context of 3 potential cases - have you communicated with Trethowans to require them to issue one claim, not 3 separate ones?

twhitehousescat

applied to DVLA once , three times or fifty times , it does not matter , the hospital and tregs are not in any AOS , so do not need to comply with any rules

this is private parking by the back door , overriding any current legislation/

Umkomaas

applied to DVLA once , three times or fifty times , it does not matter , the hospital and tregs are not in any AOS , so do not need to comply with any rules

But the DVLA have to.

Make it difficult for the Trust/Trethowans to want to carry on with this.

Get all your ducks in a row first by quietly doing quiet background research, which could then tee them up for a counterclaim if they've overstepped anywhere (like DPA misuse of data).

nigelbb

If the OP is a member of staff with a parking permit for that car then it's a very reasonable assumption that they were the driver & there is no need for POFA or purchasing keeper details from the DVLA.

Perhaps the OP could provide us full details of the "crimes". Is the OP a member of staff with a permit? Were the "crimes" committed in a staff car park? Were the "fines" for parking outside a marked bay or on double yellow lines? We need the complete picture of exactly what the "charges" are.

Le_Kirk

Private parking charges despite are always suited.......

Not sure what you meant to say here, maybe Private parking charge disputes?

The_Deep

If the OP is a member of staff with a parking permit for that car then it's a very reasonable assumption that they were the driver

Indeed, especially if he/she was at work when the PcN was issued. Unless the OP can prove that they were not the driver they might struggle imo. However, that does not mean they should not complain to their MP.

It is the will of Parliament that these scammers be put out of business. Hopefully that will take place in the near future. The Bill has passed through the HOC without hitch, and goes to the Lords soon. In the meantime involve your MP, the poor dears are buckling under the weight of complaints about these scammers. Read this one which I wrote earlier

This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of alleged contracts for alleged parking offences, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors. Is has been suggested by an MP that some of these companies may have connections to organised crime.

Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, (especially Smart}, and others have already been named and shamed in the House of Commons as have Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each week), hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned. They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

The problem has become so widespread that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers.

Sir Greg Knight's Private Members Bill to curb the excesses, and perhaps close down, some of these companies passed its Third Reading in late November, and, with a fair wind, will become Law next year.

All three readings are available to watch on the internet, (some 6-7 hours), and published in Hansard. MPs have an extremely low opinion of the industry. Many are complaining that they are becoming overwhelmed by complaints from members of the public. Add to their burden, complain in the most robust terms about the scammers.