QDR Solicitors Letter (Scotland)

REUBEN

Good evening - my first post so be gentle....I’ve read the Newbies sticky but would like reassurance nonetheless. I live in Scotland & am aware that I have no obligation to reveal the person driving as I’ve been contacted as the registered keeper of the vehicle.
Got the standard letter from QDR with a paragraph highlighting their success with the Indigo Park Services v Watson, Lindsay & Meachan case in 2017, plus the usual threats if I don’t pay in 14 days. Not too concerned about that.

My question is that if I wasn’t the driver & had proof of that, is it worth contacting QDR advising them of this via email then hopefully they’d !!!!!! off? I’ve obviously no idea who was driving at the time & neither do they as the photos provided on the PNC only show the car. I think I know the answer..........

The_Deep

Send them a FOAD letter and complain to your MP..

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 five readings are available to watch on the internet, (some 7-8 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.

beamerguy

REUBEN wrote: »

Good evening - my first post so be gentle....I’ve read the Newbies sticky but would like reassurance nonetheless. I live in Scotland & am aware that I have no obligation to reveal the person driving as I’ve been contacted as the registered keeper of the vehicle.
Got the standard letter from QDR with a paragraph highlighting their success with the Indigo Park Services v Watson, Lindsay & Meachan case in 2017, plus the usual threats if I don’t pay in 14 days. Not too concerned about that.

My question is that if I wasn’t the driver & had proof of that, is it worth contacting QDR advising them of this via email then hopefully they’d !!!!!! off? I’ve obviously no idea who was driving at the time & neither do they as the photos provided on the PNC only show the car. I think I know the answer..........

Yup you do know the answer. QDR has little hope in Scotland but of course they will try it on
QDR are only a cheapo offshoot of the disgraced Wright Hassall solicitors

Threats only work when they put them into practice and they will struggle if they don't know who the driver is

Coupon-mad

My question is that if I wasn’t the driver & had proof of that, is it worth contacting QDR advising them of this via email then hopefully they’d !!!!!! off? I’ve obviously no idea who was driving at the time & neither do they as the photos provided on the PNC only show the car.

Won't do any harm if you can prove that. Normally we say ignore but in your shoes, I would cover yourself and keep proof you told them (keep all letters for 5 years in Scotland).

DO NOT get embroiled in further correspondence, so no replying when they send some old drivel!

And if it's a retail park, take the offending letters and complain to make them cancel it. Which PPC?

REUBEN

Thanks for the replies. The PPC is Civil Enforcement Ltd. Then passed to ZZPS then this bunch. I’ve ignored all letters so far after reading various posts on here & other similar sites. I was 200 miles away when the alleged incident happened- en route to the Lake District in my campervan. Arrived at the site at an hour after the the timing of the PCN.

Coupon-mad

I would send that proof to CEL themselves (see the email addy on the PCN) and tell them to remove your data as you were not the driver, will not be naming the driver, cannot be intimidated into saying who might have been driving, cannot be held liable in Scotland, and they now have no excuse to keep processing & sharing your data, at all.

If they refuse, report them to the ICO but you'd have to take time to make sure your ICO complaint explained to the ICO, that the law in Scotland is different, that the POFA does not apply as law and parking firms can ONLY pursue drivers, and once you've proved you were not that person then they can't still use your data for any reason allowed under any applicable law, or even under the DVLA rules.

If you don't spell out such info to the ICO they may drift off mistakenly thinking a PPC can handle data for as long as they like because they can use the POFA, and had 'reasonable cause' (yes, but only limited to get the keeper's data to ask who was driving and there is no obligation on a keeper to declare the driver, and that doesn't mean in Scotland, that a parking firm can decide to then pursue the keeper who has already proved that person - the only liable party - was not them).

REUBEN

Many thanks, I’ll give that a go. I’ll keep this board informed as to how I get on.

Umkomaas

Not sure CEL would be keen to be attempting to proceed against a registered keeper in another Sheriff Court in Scotland!

https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/fp/news/local/parking-firm-cleared-of-fraud-after-landmark-court-case1/

Coupon-mad

Probably not! I agree.

But seems worth him saying now that he wasn't the driver and proving it, as it makes the weak case they thought they had, even more watery!