after 2 1/2 years I got another letter from cell

Coupon-mad

It really seems to me that sending fake CCJ letters out is as bad as (if not worse than) plenty of other conduct where PPCs have been banned by the DVLA.

Forward the entire 'BPA/you' email comms to the DVLA as well:

kadoeservice.support@dvla.gov.uk

Ask them if the BPA has told them, yet, that Civil Enforcement Ltd are (apparently) routinely sending false CCJ letters to people who haven't got CCJs and whose cases have not had court decisions at all.

Show them your own proof, and say that you want the DVLA to take this seriously, given that the keeper data emanated from the DVLA in ALL the cases reported. To abuse a registered keeper's this way to lie to people (even in error) about 'having a CCJ that must be paid and has gone to court' MUST surely be cause for a ban.

If not, then exactly what are the most serious Code breaches all about?

Add this in your email to the DVLA:

I would remind you that ATA members MUST abide by the KADOE rules, and ATAs must:
• maintain records of all complaints and what they have done to resolve them
• monitor members to make sure they comply with the code of practice
• when appropriate, expel or suspend any member that fails to comply with the code of practice
and tell us within 24 hours of the expulsion or suspension
• investigate any complaints at our request about an alleged breach of the code of practice or misuse of DVLA information and report the outcome back to the DVLA.

Given that the DVLA states in a Government document:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/861052/inf266-release-of-information-from-dvlas-registers.pdf

...that ''ATAs that fail to enforce their code of practice could lose their DVLA accreditation'' then the DVLA must robustly investigate the current spate of these false CCJ letters that have been reported online in several cases, and find out what the BPA are doing about this major breach. Clearly, the abuse of DVLA data to falsely tell goodness knows how many victims that they have a CCJ, cannot be explained as a mistake, and even if it is an issue caused by one employee, this conduct is so very serious as to surely be on a par with previous data bans imposed by the DVLA, especially with the timing being when the Government is considering the new Code of Practice rules.

Finish by saying:

This example is atrocious and cannot be swept under a BPA or DVLA carpet, and the outcome of this investigation is being closely followed by MSE forum posters. No-one knows how many scared victims have paid - and clearly need to be refunded immediately by this AOS member firm - but this is not the point. The point is, this cannot be allowed to be left unpunished in the eyes of the public who currently have close to have zero faith in the DVLA and the two ATAs.

I look forward to hearing from you as to the outcome of the BPA's investigation and how the DVLA views it. If it is considered to be an insufficient outcome (along the lines of ''it's an admin error involving a limited number of motorists'') be advised that this is not good enough. The public are watching and there are MSE forum posters who are waiting to show this example to the Government Department responsible for the new regulatory Code, to demonstrate how ATAs and the DVLA have (in the past, and it is feared, now again) scrabbled and colluded to excuse and effectively cover up the very worst conduct of private parking firms. These are companies who show no interest whatsover in consumer law, proper data processing or fair and open dealing with motorists, and this AOS member chooses not to use the POFA in its Notice to Keepers, making it eve worse that they have written to those keepers telling them they have a CCJ and must pay it, when the keepers are not liable in law anyway.

I hope that the above report to the MHCLG does not have to happen but this conduct is inexcusable, and I look forward to hearing from the DVLA as well as from Mr Clark.

Kenni66

Dear Mr Ngai,

!

Many thanks for contacting the DVLA with your concerns.

!

Regulation 27 (1)(e) of the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 2002 permits the disclosure of vehicle keeper information to those who can demonstrate a reasonable cause for needing it.! The release of information under this legislation is not based on the consent of the data subject. Regulation 27 provides a legal gateway for the release of information. Disclosure in these circumstances does not breach the Data Protection Law and the Information Commissioner’s Office is fully aware that data held on the DVLA’s records is released in this way.

!

I can confirm that a request for vehicle keeper information was made with DVLA by Civil Enforcement Ltd on 22nd November 2016. Your vehicle keeper information would have been released the following day that a request was made.

!

The company in question, Civil Enforcement Ltd, is a member of the British Parking Association (BPA) which is an Accredited Trade Association for the parking industry. The BPA’s code of practice is published on its website at https://www.britishparking.co.uk under the heading “Approved Operators Scheme”. If a member of this scheme does not comply with the code of practice, it may be suspended or expelled, during which time no data will be provided to it by the DVLA.! If you feel that any of the practices used by the company do not comply with the BPA’s code of practice, you may wish to contact the BPA at Stuart House, 41- 43 Perrymount Road, Haywards Heath, RH16 3BN.

!

Kind regards

!

Nathan James

Compliance Officer

Umkomaas

Did you include in your letter to the DVLA all the details Coupon-mad listed above?

Le_Kirk

What good did that "copy and paste template rubbish" do for you/us? It reads like a standard spiel and does not answer the questions raised. I would go back and ask when they are going to actually "investigate" rather than spouting patronising drivel!

Kenni66

That was the reply I got when I wrote to dvla before the template Coupon-mad post. I will reply or send another email to dvla.

Kenni66

Just received a reply from Steve Clark;

I have been in dialogue with CEL on your behalf as promised.

You should receive a letter in the next few days from them that explains the situation and confirms that your PCN has been cancelled.

I am alert to postings on MSE that there might be other similar cases and I am currently working with CEL to identify these and resolve them.
I wanted you to know that your case had been resolved as soon as
!

All the best

Steve Clark FBPA

Head of Business Operations

British Parking Association

Umkomaas

Good result via Steve Clark (a decent human being) and helpful for you, but the fundamental issue hasn't gone away, so I'd encourage you to send the Coupon-mad letter to the DVLA.

The_Deep

IMO the most important avenue of complaint should be through Trading Standards. The BPA and DVLA both have axes to grind.

nosferatu1001

Ijndeed, i would complain to CAB and ask them to raise it to trading standards (usually your only route to TS locally is via CAB)

Ask TEHM to investigate why the DVLA isnt taking its Data Controller duties seruiously.

Coupon-mad

Definitely needs the DVLA breathing down the BPA's neck and considering cutting off CEL's data supply.

COMPLAIN using my words to the DVLA.

It makes no real difference overall IMHO, that Steve Clark has got it cancelled and is looking to cancel others too (effectively this just helps CEL hide it). As expected, Mr Clark has investigated and has been true to his word but this is a carpet lifting exercise - damage limitation.

Don't let that carpet be lifted. The dust needs to be swept to the DVLA.