Voyeurmse: DCBLegal Autosec DelGrosso

Voyeurmse

95Rollers said:

Coupon-mad said:

No idea why he thinks you are asking him to act as your solicitor, it's merely a known working address where this Claimant can reasonably be reached, given he appears to be refusing or returning post sent to the registered address of his company.

I would definitely email him back politely stating that you've never asked or implied or insinuated you expected him to act as "your solicitor" as you know how things work! It just seemed a bit patronising and best to politely set out your stall early to reinforce the fact you know your stuff and what you're should he try and think he can fob you off 😉  not saying he's like that, but doesn't hurt to clarify the situation of what your expecting as it seems hasn't quite grasped it.

I responded today....
Dear Graham,

Thank you for the update. 

You seemed concerned that I expected you to act as a solicitor, please be assured this has never crossed my mind.  However I am hopeful that letters from my MP asking relevant questions will get a respectful response, as opposed to being ignored.  

I look forward to any other responses pending, in particular DCBLegal. 

Once again thank you for your efforts. 

Regards,

95Rollers

Voyeurmse 

Yeah, good luck with that one.  The latest is Del Grosso has moved to Italy!  DCBLegal will have to work very hard for this lot.

I wonder why!?! Or more to the point just exactly what or who is he running from!?!  I wonder who he has burnt this time...🤔

Voyeurmse

I guess this must be his current contact address for post to be undelivered to...He renewed his ICO status yesterday. 

Voyeurmse

It would appear the BPA have managed to contact DG.  He’s spun them a pack of lies to code breaches.  Unexpectedly the replies could be very useful...

Voyeurmse

Q: if a PCN was issued and no NTK before or after 56 days, is it still recoverable?

Rodent3768

IFAIK If NTK is after 56 days they can only pursue Driver if they have been identified. No liability for the keeper. That's one of the reasons the forum says not to identify the driver. However, if it gets to court and the judge asks if you're the driver you have to reply truthfully. Problem is the document from the claimant will usually pursue you as driver and/or keeper which are two entirely separate entities. 

Rodent3768

Voyeurmse said:

I guess this must be his current contact address for post to be undelivered to...He renewed his ICO status yesterday. 

I know where this is as AutoSec claimed all the area for their ticketing zone, not that they have the agreement from the other property owners.

Voyeurmse

Can DCBL (as member of BPA) request keeper details from DVLA on behalf or Autosec (not members of BPA?)

KeithP

Voyeurmse said:

Can DCBL (as member of BPA) request keeper details from DVLA on behalf or Autosec (not members of BPA?)

DCBL are not a member of the BPA's Approved Operators Scheme so no they are not allowed to get data directly from the DVLA via a KADOE contract.

Of course anyone with reasonable cause, even you or I, can pay a fee to the DVLA and retrieve a Registered Keeper's details.

Edited to add:
Sorry, got that first bit wrong.

Rodent3768

I would imagine that the NTK might have initially come from TNC having an invalid contract with Autosec (no witnesses, wrong level of staff signing, amended after signing - take your pick) before DCBL and then DCB Legal got involved. That's what happened in my circumstances.