Disabled badge was partially covered!

bandolockdown98

KeithP said:

Isn't that amazing!!

The timestamps on those two photographs you have shown us have exactly the same timestamp - to the second.

We will have to assume they had two synchronised photographers.

Anyone think of another way UKPC could've managed that?  

Yeah I've noticed that too! The exact second! do you think that can be one of the grounds for cancellation of shady business?

B789

KeithP said:

Isn't that amazing!!

The timestamps on those two photographs you have shown us have exactly the same timestamp - to the second.

We will have to assume they had two synchronised photographers.

Anyone think of another way UKPC could've managed that?  

Photoshop?

Fruitcake

The driver is not involved and should sit on their hands in the corner, and say and do nothing.

The keeper should deal with this, but must not lie.

The registered keeper should complain to the landowner/retail site manager that the sub contractor they employ has breached the Equality Act 2010 by failing to make reasonable adjustments, which is a criminal offence. An occupant of the car has protected characteristics in accordance with the above Act, and therefore the driver was entitled to use an accessible bay to assist this occupant.
Issuing a charge in this instance constitutes direct discrimination by UKPC as defined by the Act, and is a criminal offence.
The landowner/site managing agent is liable for the actions of their sub-contractor and have therefore also committed a criminal act.

A valid disabled badge was displayed as can clearly be seen from UKPC's own images, and therefore there was no breach of parking terms.

The dodgy timestamps should be reported to the BPA, the DVLA, and the DVLA KADOE team, and should be included in the keeper's complaints to the landowner and the keeper's MP.
Add in all complaints that UKPC have previously been caught doctoring timestamps on their images and were previously banned from obtaining keeper data from the DVLA.

DVLA complaint email addresses are as follows.

ccrt@dvla.gov.uk 

and

KADOEservice.support@dvla.gov.uk

Include copies of the images with all your complaints.

fisherjim

You do not stoop to a scammers level and lie, also goes against you in court if it should get there.

As @Fruitcake has told you, that sign does not conform to the BPA COP and could be a winning point a POPLA, just have a good look at it, in typical UKPC fashion they have disregarded what they are supposed to conform to (clue: look under Terms of Parking at all times)!

From BPA COP:

19.4 If you intend to use the keeper liability provisions in
Schedule 4 of POFA 2012, your signs must give ’adequate
notice’. This includes:
• specifying the sum payable for unauthorised parking
• adequately bringing the charges to the attention of
drivers, and
• following any applicable government signage regulations.