Let's not waste an opportunity. Updated now with the sweet taste of victory.

Sue_Danim

Sent original complaint to him, he replied and copied in gemma something tood me she was the person to communicate with. I delt with her from then. 

beamerguy

Sue_Danim said:

Sent original complaint to him, he replied and copied in gemma something tood me she was the person to communicate with. I delt with her from then. 

We have known for a long time that the "tail wags the dog" with the BPA
This is private club run by it's members. Hence the BPA is not fit for purpose
Mr Clark should take his position more seriously and not pass it downline  

Le_Kirk

Sue_Danim said:

Sent original complaint to him, he replied and copied in gemma something tood me she was the person to communicate with. I delt with her from then. 

That would be Gemma Dorrans then.

Coupon-mad

How on EARTH have the BPA closed this complaint?  Have you referred your evidence to the DVLA?

Sue_Danim

I didnt include my correspondence with bpa in the thread here it is for your viewing displeasure.

///////////////////////

[Quote]Dear Sue Danim

BPA – 2.71828

I have investigated your complaint with the Operator and can advise as follows.

 

Smart Parking have provided us with sufficient evidence to support the fact they do have a valid contract with the landowner.  We have also reviewed the land registry plan which supports Smart Parking’s position.

 

If there is a dispute over who owns the land, this is a matter between the landowner and the Council. This is not something the BPA can become involved in.

 

In view of the above, we are content that Smart Parking have not breached our Code of Practice on this point.

 

You advised that you did not receive a POPLA code with your rejection letter.  Smart Parking have responded and advised they did not treat your initial correspondence as an appeal and detailed how you should appeal. 

 

Further correspondence has been received by Smart Parking and therefore this will be reviewed as an appeal and if the appeal is rejected, they will provide you with a POPLA code. 

 

As we have not identified a breach of our Code of Practice, we have closed the case[/Quote]

/////////__//////////////

That was after my appeal was rejected and I had sent in my Nanu nanu letter,  I guess that is the further correspondence they referred to. Though both it and the original appeal were entered on smart parkings website using the, I must now assume incorrectly titled appeal button, that may or may not be treated as an appeal.

The mention that the deeds supported smart parking were what triggered me ordering a copy myself, however like everything else NI has it's own department and process, with the virus closing most things getting land registry docs now requires writing to the belfast office with a request who phone you take payment and then post out what ypure after so it's taking a bit longer than expected.

I replied to that restating the actions and statements of local politicians and council. Mentioned I invited moronic parking to prive the debt by proving the road was private and had recieved no proof or evidence of that fact, evidence the BPA had just claimed to have viewed, that of land deeds. The reply again from Gemma but under the AOS title is below.

%//////////////////

Thank you for your reply.

 

Smart Parking do not have to provide you with a copy of the contract they have with the landowner.  We have reviewed the contract and are content.

 

If there is a dispute between the landowner and the Council, this is a matter between them. 

 

We are aware the signage has been taken down and Smart Parking are dealing with the removal of their property directly. 

 

If your appeal has been rejected by Smart Parking, we would suggest you follow the appeals process through to POPLA if you want to contest it. 

///////////////

Shortly after this my appeal(that is my second letter, or the first appeal by their logic) was succesful and crushed it.

I wonder how effective what I used as my point C alone is as a def. (NI)

I dispute this debt in its entirety, please prove a debt exists by showing I as the keeper am responsible for the debt or I am obligated to identify the driver.

My intention on receipt of the registry info is to write to local MLA, MP minister for roads(whichever one is responsible) with the above BPA correspondence as evidence they are not fit for purpose. 

Sue_Danim

How on EARTH have the BPA closed this complaint?  Have you referred your evidence to the DVLA?

They wouldn't get away with that sort of behaviour on Ork. Waiting out on the registry documents if private the charge is irrefutable illegitimate and that I believe opens a DPA shaped can of worms  and shows either the BPA were dishonest to claim to have viewed those docs or they supported Smart parking or what they recieved had been edited by smart parking or the mental car park owner.

As a slight aside, I do not have a photo of it, but the council have had other run ins with this loon, he has extended and painted his own double yellows on the street requiring them to be burnt off. There is a buisness and a youth club or something that had fire escapes that exited onto the surface car park, you can see one on google maps at point, if you go to street view and look around:

54.512359,  -6.047556

Look at the ground level car park and find his handiwork by the fire door. It's no longer there, it was removed only to be replaced  by a larger 4ft wide 8ft tall single chain link fence section. Serving no purpose other than blocking use of the door. Utterly surreal looking. 

As for smart parking I guess the answer to when is an appeal not an appeal is when you point out that their rejection should be accompanied with a popla code then suddenly it wasnt really an appeal but the next one will be treated as one.

Molts

Down here in the "sunny" South East we have a useful little function for looking up adopted highway:
https://apps.eastsussex.gov.uk/roadsandtransport/roads/roadadoption/find/
Had a quick scan for similar in NI to no avail but maybe you will have more luck knowing what to look for?

Fruitcake

Sue_Danim said:

How on EARTH have the BPA closed this complaint?  Have you referred your evidence to the DVLA?

They wouldn't get away with that sort of behaviour on Ork. Waiting out on the registry documents if private the charge is irrefutable illegitimate and that I believe opens a DPA shaped can of worms  and shows either the BPA were dishonest to claim to have viewed those docs or they supported Smart parking or what they recieved had been edited by smart parking or the mental car park owner.

This is the crux of the matter. Either the scammers were operating on a public highway or they weren't. If they were, then the law, at least over this side of the Irish Sea, usually states something like "the scammers knew or should have known."
Before signing a contract to scam, the man on the Clapham omnibus would expect them to check that the landowner really was the landowner and had a right to employ the scammers.
Saying that they had a contract is not enough.
Saying they didn't know the client was not actually the landowner is not enough. 
They should have done their own research before signing the contract.

One other thing, over here signage requires Advertising Consent in accordance with the Town and Country Planning Act. Not having it is a criminal offence, but only the council can pursue it. If the same is tru in NI, and it is proven to be council/public land then pressure should be brought on the council to prosecute the scammers for this criminal act.

I would also suggest that issuing PCNs, some of which will have been paid, would be tantamount to obtaining monies by deception as well as demanding money with menaces.