PCM won't deal with me as I'm a "third party" because I won't name driver

Smilee72

Hi all

I've sent Parking Control Management (PCM) one of the template letters from MSE in response to a fine I received as the vehicle owner and as i did not name the driver they are citing the Data Protection Act.

"Unfortunately we are unable to progress your appeal further at present, as you are a third party making the appeal on behalf of the driver.

Like many other business sectors, due to conditions imposed by the Data Protection Act we are prevented from disclosing or discussing information or issues with a third party who is not the driver or vehicle keeper.

We can however progress an appear once we are in receipt of signed and dated written consent from the driver of the vehicle at the time of the issue of the PCN which gives you full authority to act on their behalf and to receive any relevant information or data relating to them. Please see form on the reverse.

We look forward to receiving such consent by return enabling us to progress this particular appeal for review and action"....

It then has a para about them being the 'data controller under GDPR.

And then the letter finishes with: "If you are unable to divulge the above information, payment of £60 for the above notice can me be made....."

Any thoughts or guidance would be appreciated!

Many thanks

Lee

Fruitcake

You have revealed the driver's identity in your post above. Edit it to remove that information before you do anything else.

It is not a fine by the way.

Which template did you use? Hopefully the blue one from the NEWBIES not the awful one from the "official" MSE site.

Send the appeal template in blue form the NEWBIES as Keeper, not owner this time. Owner, keeper, registered keeper, and driver are four different people. The keeper has protections in law that the driver does not.

This all assumes the vehicle was not leased or hired.

Do not reveal the driver's identity at any point.

What happened when you complained to the landowner?

Have you complained to your MP yet about this unregulated scam?

Smilee72

Thanks Fruitcake.

I think I might have used the official one :-(

Where do I find the NEWBIES templates?

I haven't complained to the landowner (The Fort in Birmingham) or my MP. I was focused on PCM as the PCN sender.

Redx

the sticky threads are at the top of this forum near where you started your thread

try the third thread down , post #1 for the initial appeal template (in blue text) from the KEEPER (not the "owner")

the first 5 posts are valuable info and your "bible"


NEVER blab about who was driving , especially not on a public forum that the sc@mmers read

Fruitcake

The NEWBIES was just underneath where you clicked on the button.

It tells you to read it before starting a thread, and also tells you to always complain to the landowner before appealing.

If the scammers refuse an appeal from the keeper then complain to the DVLA as well as complaining again to your MP. There is actually no reason why the vehicle owner can't appeal but they are not covered by the PoFA 2012 whereas the keeper. registered keeper, and driver are.

Smilee72

Thanks Redx and Fruitcake.

What are the "powers" of private land owners or parking firms to enforce parking restrictions and roads markings that would normally be applicable on public roads eg double yellow lines?

KeithP

Smilee72 wrote: »

What are the "powers" of private land owners or parking firms to enforce parking restrictions and roads markings that would normally be applicable on public roads eg double yellow lines?

If you agree with the landowner or their agent that you will not, for example, park on Double Yellow Lines, and then break that agreement, the other party can sue you.

Fruitcake

Signage forms the contract between the motorist and parking scammers, so it will all depend on the wording and images on the signs.

A sign may say no parking on double yellow lines, but if say the motorist was dropping off a passenger or stopped momentarily to turn the vehicle around, they are not parking.

However, if the signs say no parking, or staff parking only, but a member of the public parks, the signs are forbidding and no contract is formed because nothing has been offered.

Then there is the contract between the landowner and the scammers. The scammers may be able to issue charges and take people to court, or that permission may not be written into their contract with the landowner so they should not take people to court, but some might do it anyway because they are money grabbing scammers.

It is not a simple subject.

Smilee72

Is that in the form of a PCN?

Sorry, should have given the full story up front - the driver was parked on double yellows for probably 2-3 mins in a car park while using a cash machine. They have a number of photos as evidence - he/she was quick!

Redx

grace periods and forbidding signage also play a part, and so 2 to 3 minutes is not "parking" as such, read the relevant CoP to see what grace periods apply

a judge may decide that motorists should treat yellow lines in the same manner as they would on a public highway

a landowner would normally take you to court for "trespassing"

a private parking company (PPC) may take you to court for not paying their invoice (the PCN)

Fruitcake

You have given away the driver's identity again in post 9 by revealing who was parked on double yellow lines.

Do/did the signs say motorists can't park on double yellows?