Highview Parking confirm receipt of an appeal I didn't send.

P_Hog

Hi ( I've never posted on a forum like this before - so please be gentle),

A couple of weeks ago (Jan 2019) I had a letter on my doorstep from Highview Parking "Legal Action Pending", I don't know exactly when it arrived as I'd been away of Christmas and in the New Year but the letter was dated 24th Dec 2018 (Merry Christmas!). It cited 2 earlier letters: a "notice" (16th Nov)and a "reminder" (5th Dec) neither of which I received. This was pertaining to a car park visit on 10th Nov 2018.

I tried to log on to their appeals website but it wouldn't let me make an appeal as it said the deadline for an appeal had expired. So, I sent them a short letter explaining that I hadn't received their "notice" or "reminder" and could they send me copies, preferably via email.

I received an email the day after posting with PDFs of the missing letters giving their dates of posting but saying no appeal could be made and this had been passed to debt collectors. Unfazed, I made a short reply acknowledging that I had now received those letters and would consider their contents and reply in due course.

Now, the odd bit. I had an immediate email straight back from them:

Subject: Your Appeal application has been recieved (sic)
Thank you for your appeal submitted via our website.
Further action on your Parking Charge Notice has been put on hold - please wait to hear from us.
We aim to write back to you within 14 working days... blah blah

I have not submitted an appeal on their website! I note that this email makes no reference to a PCN number, VRN, date of appeal, appellant's name. Which I presume is standard (i.e. sharp, obfuscating) practice for a PPC.

My question is: Should I make it clear to them that I have not (yet?) submitted an appeal?

I have the usual grounds to dispute their claim (as per the newbies thread etc). But I also dispute that their "notice" or "reminder" were sent (or certainly received). It seems reasonable to assert that they do not keep accurate records of their communications? Their latest email clearly demonstrates this!

I'd love to hear what anyone thinks!

Redx

I think that if you emailed them , they have an automatic reply system which sent you this spurious notice, I would ignore it and appeal anyway using the blue text appeal, by post if required, with a free certificate of posting from the P.O.


also send their DPO a SAR by email and get all their data on you

P_Hog

Hi Redx, Thanks for your rapid reply!

Yes, that was my assumption too. But what they've demonstrated is that their automated systems send spurious notices to people. Should I disregard this notice on the assumption it's spurious? In which case how am I to decide which of their other (future and past) communications should be disregarded on the basis they've been generated by a broken automated system? Sorry, I have a broader problem with us real people having to engage with automated systems!

Sorry if I've missed it in one of the beginner threads but what are the advantages of sending an appeal things via post? Via email I get the proof of sending for free too - but with less hassle. And, is there any significance (eg. with BOPLA) to having missed their "deadline" for an appeal?

Is there any advantage to waiting before sending a SAR? eg. if they end up gathering more data on me I might want to send another SAR which they might be entitled to charge me for.

nosferatu1001

They do not have to "hear" an appeal out of time, meaning they do not have to reject, meaning they do not have to allow you to appeal to POPLA.

No there is no reason to delay
No, they cannto charge, because you make sure your SAR is proportionate by requiring only daata between OLD DATE and NEW DATE where OLD DATE is date of old SAR.

Redx

I believe you are overthinking this auto-reply and its clouding your thinking, IGNORE it and get on with the real stuff (Highview and other parking companies are well known for incompetence and lack of due diligence and sc@mming the public)

if their NTK allows an appeal by email, then do so and copy yourself into the address bar, for proof of delivery

if its too late to appeal online or by email, do it by post like I said

if they say you have missed the initial appeal deadline of 28 days, they will refuse to issue a POPLA code, meaning that you cannot appeal to popla

send the SAR whenver you think fit to do so

The_Deep

The whole industry is a scam, relying on threats of court, and the public's ignorance of the Law, A bill is currently before parliament which will regulate the scammers, many of whom are ex-clampers.

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 Second Reading in the Lords this month, and, with a fair wind, will l become Law later this 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.

Coupon-mad

Do not reply, wait and see what they send next, or send a SAR for all data held.

How could two letters have not been received? Do you have postal problems?

You are lucky this is only Highview, as they are tame. But complain to the landowner or retailer anyway (Tesco?).

P_Hog

Thanks everyone, The more I've read on these forums the more I've realised you guys truly are heroes of the modern age. Keep up the good work!

Yes, I am almost certainly overthinking the auto-reply. And conjuring all manner of nonsense legal arguments. Sounds like I should stick to the script!

The carpark is for Streatham Leisure Centre, operated by "Better" aka GLL (Greenwich Leisure Ltd), A non-for-profit/social enterprise I believe operate the centre for Lambeth Council. I've drafted a message to GLL appealing to their good nature but I can't imagine they are the actual landowner. There's a adjoining carpark for a big Tesco next door which is why I imagine Highview "manage" both carparks.

I can only hypothesise as to why I haven't had the letters. But I know I haven't received them; I'm not someone who ignores post. But I have for example had things have been mis-delivered to my neighbours before.

The sad truth is that if I'd received Highview's first letter I probably would have just paid the £40 ransom rather than go to the trouble of working out what had happened, drafting appeals etc. But it's started at £120 which is more than I can swallow.

I think for now I'll contact the leisure centre and next send a SAR but perhaps not send a full appeal to Highview until I've at got my data back from the SAR. I'm also inclined to send a SAR to "Debt Recovery Plus".

P_Hog

Hi,
Opened a first letter from Debt Recover Plus this morning. I know you said ignore the auto reply email from Highview but given that it says my case is on hold I think I can be pretty fierce with DRP.
I've made some bullet points for my reply to them. I'd love to get your your thoughts:

Dear Madam,

• RE: PCN...
• I've received a fraudulent Claim from you dated 23/1/2019. This is causes me significant distress.
• I have received communication from your client before the date of your letter which I believe excludes any legitimate interest by DRP in my affairs. I suggest you liaise with your client.
• Cease and Desist from contacting me with any further demands.
• Any further demands may be treated as harassment
• In this event will not hesitate to shall seek damages fro you, including BNLT reasonable costs for my time in administering this matter, damages for distress to myself and my family and any cost I incur.
• As well as civil remedy I remind you that harassment is a criminal offence for which debt recovery companies have been successfully prosecuted.
• I Recommend in future you take reasonable care to establish that your client is actively pursuing a valid legal claim before criminally harassing private persons.

I will also send a letter to their Data Officer exercising a number of rights under the GDPR

• GDPR: SAR.
• GDPR: Explicit forbid processing and retention of my personal data to the maximum extent permitted by law.
• GDPR: Corrections
• GDPR: Deletions. No contract with DRP. Withhold consent. No legitimate business interest. Thus I request deletion of all my data
• £17,000,000.

What do you think? Am I pushing it too far? Is there any reason not to? Have I missed anything?

KeithP

Earlier it was suggested that you were overthinking the situation.

You ask "What do you think?"

I think you are now doing the same again.

I think you should ignore debt collectors letters.

But ultimately, the choice is yours.


Where did you get that £17,000,000 figure from?

Coupon-mad

It's only Highview and debt collectors. Nothing to worry about!