I'm not a PCN virgin any more.

Fruitcake

Following my wind-up email to DCB Limited as per my post on the 12th,

I'm not a PCN virgin any more. — MoneySavingExpert Forum

I got a response saying that my comments were noted. Oh goody. Then they go on to allege I still owe £170, despite the fact that the PCN is no longer appearing on the Parkmaven website.

Just to wind them up a bit more I replied, but without telling them the PCN has been cancelled.

Dear Mister Riley.

      Your company needs to get its act together. I know for a fact that you are not instructed by your client, Parkmaven Limited, to recover the outstanding balance of £00.00 in relation to the Parking Charge Notice (PCN), reference Borax222 issued to me.

      I suggest you contact your client for further instruction. Better yet, contact the hotel owner where the alleged event took place and the UK CEO of Intercontinental Hotels Group (IHG), your client's principal, to obtain further instruction from them.

      Since I owe neither DCB Limited, nor Parkmaven Limited any monies at all, I shall be making a complaint to the British Parking Association about your demands for payment not actually due.

      In future, please only contact me by post so I can make some more paper briquettes for my multi-fuel stove. Winter is coming.

Regards

Fruitcake, vehicle registered keeper.

I shall now complain to the BPA that Parkmaven are still pursuing me via DCBL even though the charge has been cancelled. Both companies are BPA members.

I like this game. 

Le_Kirk

Popcorn ordered, even though I hate the stuff!  I can always send it to you to add to your briquettes! 

Fruitcake

Le_Kirk said:

Popcorn ordered, even though I hate the stuff!  I can always send it to you to add to your briquettes! 

I'm not expecting anything to happen as a result of my complaints. I just like annoying the PPCs and their ilk and wasting their time.

Fruitcake

Response to SAR received this morn, revealing that three letters were allegedly sent to me, but non arrived.

This is my proposed time-wasting response. Note that Parkmaven use a two tier complaints system, and complaints must be submitted by post. None of it matters because the charge has been cancelled, but I am retired and getting paid 24/7 no matter what I am doing.

Sirs,

            I recently received a letter from your agent, Direct Collections Bailiffs Limited, alleging that I owed £170 regarding an alleged parking event at a hotel near Bristol. This was a complete surprise since I had never received any previous communication from Parkmaven Limited.

             As you are aware, it is a breach of the British Parking Association’s Code of Practice to commence the debt collection process without first giving the motorist the opportunity to appeal. Since Parkmaven Limited never sent me a notice to keeper nor any reminder documents, I was of course denied the opportunity to appeal the charge.

             I did however receive a notice of recovery letter from DCB Limited, and an email also demanding monies after I responded to the original debt letter, despite the charge having been cancelled on instruction from the landowner. I consider receipt of this DCB Limited letter to be the date of the event referred to in my complaints below. **

**I've included this comment because Parkmaven only allow complaints within 56 days of the "event", but don't actually define what an event constitutes.**

             I am therefore making a formal complaint against Parkmaven Limited for failing to issue me with a parking charge notice. Having already sent a Subject Access Request to your Data Protection Officer, and having received a reply, I note that Parkmaven Limited hold a copy of a Reminder, and a Final Reminder for this alleged parking event in addition to the original alleged notice to keeper, but neither of these were issued (given) to me.

             It seems very suspicious that three letters allegedly sent to me by Parkmaven Limited did not arrive, yet a debt recovery letter demanding nearly three times the original discount payment amount did, despite me having lived at the same address for over forty years, and despite both Parkmaven Limited and DCB Limited having my correct and current address for service on file.

             Please therefore explain why the three documents mentioned above were not given, and provide proof of posting for each and all letters allegedly sent to me.

             Further to the above, I am making a formal complaint that Parkmaven Limited instructed DCB Limited to pursue me for the alleged debt after the charge was cancelled.

             In addition, it appears that the driver entered the vehicle registration mark of the car they normally drive, not the one they were driving on the date of the alleged event. This should have resulted in a reduced payment offer of £20 as per the current BPA CoP. Since Parkmaven failed to offer this reduced charge, I am making another formal complaint to Parkmaven about this breach of the BPA CoP.

             All of this could have been avoided if Parkmaven in particular, and all unregulated private parking companies in general used typo-proof keypads or payment machines. The cynic in me believes Parkmaven in particular, and many unregulated private parking companies in general steadfastly refuse to use this readily available typo-proof technology simply to generate more income. It is no wonder the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities has stated that the actions of unregulated private parking companies has caused a market failure in the parking industry.

             Since I was not made aware of this parking charge until I received the letter from DCB Limited, dated the 3rd of November 2023, this is the event and date from which my complaints stem, and is my interpretation as defined by the Consumer Rights Act 2015 of the date of the event referred to in Parkmaven’s complaints policy.

 

Regards

 

Fruitcake, Registered Keeper

Vehicle Registration: -             LLNNLLL

Parkmaven PCN number: -     NNNNNNN

DCBL reference number: -      NNNNNNN

Parkmaven SAR number: -      NNNNN

Date parking charge cancelled: -        14/11/2023

Date of email from DCBL further demanding payment (stating that they were instructed by Parkmaven limited to pursue the charge) despite it being cancelled: -            21/11/2023

Fruitcake

The PCN that keeps on giving. Having re-read Parkmaven's response to my SAR, I realised that they haven't included correspondence from the landowner, nor correspondence to DCBL.

I have replied to their DPO's email thusly,

Sirs,

      Thank you for responding to my Subject Access Request (SAR), however I am concerned to note that some of my personal data that you hold about me is missing.

      On the 3rd of November I received a demand for debt recovery from your agent, Direct Collections Bailiffs Limited (DCB Limited). You obviously passed my personal data to DCB Limited, but have not included the data you hold about me that you supplied to DCB Limited in response to my SAR. 

      In addition, you have not included my personal data sent to you by the landowner where the Parking Charge Notice originated.

      I remind you that I am entitled to copies of all my personal data that you hold. Of course, it is perfectly reasonable for you to redact any commercially sensitive data, but you are not permitted to withhold my personal data upon receiving a SAR.

      Please therefore supply the missing data within seven days of this email. If you fail to do so I will make a complaint to the Information Commissioner's Office about your company, Parkmaven Limited, failing to supply me with all my personal data that you hold about me, as well as to your trade association, The British Parking Association.

Regards

Fruitcake

Fruitcake

I got a response about my complaint to the BPA that Parkmaven only allow complaints by post, not by email or online. The response did not address my complaint, but explained the appeals process (which I don't need because the landowner cancelled the charge) and then directed me to Parkaven's complains procedure ... that states complaints can only be made by post.

I now have, "There's a hole in my bucket, Dear Lisa, Dear Lisa ..." going round inside my head.

Below is my response.

Ms H,

      Thank you for your reply, but it does not help in the slightest. My complaint was that Parkmaven only allows complaints by post, not by email nor online, yet you have directed me to the parking operator's complaints procedure that states complaints can only be made by post. I already knew this, which is why I complained to the BPA. 

      People with disabilities such as myself are being forced to visit a Post Office as a result of this, which could be classed as discrimination as defined by the Equality Act 2010. It is also a barrier to people who live in rural areas and need to travel some distance to get to a Post Office. I also believe it is a delaying tactic by the operator, and a nuisance deliberately put in place in the hope that motorists with a complaint will give up.

      It is no wonder our MPs have referred to the parking industry as rogues, scammers, and bloodsuckers, and more recently has referred to the way unregulated parking companies operate, and their trade associations, as a market failure.

Luv and Kisses 

Fruitcake



Meanwhile, Parkmaven have failed to respond to my complaint that they failed to supply all my personal data I requested in my SAR within the seven day deadline I gave them to remedy this.
I will now make further complaints to the BPA and ICO about this breach of the DPA/GDPR as I stated I would do when I complained.

I'm a pensioner, and therefore I'm effectively salaried staff, getting paid whilst I do this stuff. I am quite happy therefore to waste the unregulated parking industry's time and money whilst I get paid to do it.

1505grandad

" I'm a pensioner, and therefore I'm effectively salaried staff, getting paid whilst I do this stuff. I am quite happy therefore to waste the unregulated parking industry's time and money whilst I get paid to do it."

Same here  -  although alas I am (personally) still a pcn virgin.

I also like to waste the landowners time (I call it "educating"). 

Fruitcake

Bummer, I've just realised the PPC still has 12 of the 30 days to respond to my initial SAR with the data they failed to send me in their response, so I'll have to wait and hope they don't reply by that deadline.

Meanwhile however, DCBL have decided to come out to play again, despite a collections associate telling me they weren't going to. A collections manager no less has sent me a Final Reminder. Deep joy.

This is my proposed response,

"Ms E,

      Does KH know about your embargo on written communication to me, because the very same day that you sent me the email below, your collections manager sent me a Final Reminder by post about the very same matter?

      I ask because you said, and I quote, "DCBL are unable to enter any further written correspondence regarding your case" (by the way, is there a word missing between, "enter" and "any", or should it read "entertain any"?) yet this is not true.

      Please make up your minds. If DCBL are able to entertain any further correspondence concerning this matter, as evidenced by KH's letter, why did you say DCBL are unable to do this. Alternatively, if DCBL are unable to enter into any further correspondence concerning this, how was KH been able to correspond in writing. Your statement and K's actions are contrary and contradictory.

      I would also like to know why the "Final Reminder" from DCBL contains untrue statements. For example, it says, "In the event that a claim is issued against you, further fees and costs will be incurred and these will be added to the balance that you owe our client." I shall be complaining about your false use of the word I have highlighted to the British Parking Association, of which your company is a remember.

      Not that the BPA will do anything, but I do enjoy getting paid to write to these complaints. I've already written two to the BPA about your client, and I am drafting a third, plus one to the Information Commissioner's Office. What fun!

      First of all, your client will not, indeed cannot, issue a claim against me.

      Secondly, your use of the word, "will" is misleading. Even if your client was able to issue a claim, which they are nor, further fees and costs, "may" be added, but there is no guarantee that they will be, especially since DCBL offer a no-win, no-fee contract to your clients. If they took me to court, it would mean that DCBL had failed to collect, therefore there would have been no win, therefore no fee would have been incurred by your client. They are not lawfully able to claim for fees, referred to by the DLUHC as "an attempt at extortion" that they have not spent.

      Thirdly, the balance that I owe your client is zero.

      Perhaps instead of your manager wasting their time on money sending me more firelighters (for which I am actually grateful) you could actually ask your client for further direction. Personally I don't care. I'm getting paid to do this, but I do worry about the damage it is doing to the environment, although that is tempered by your dedication to keep the Royal Mail in business.

Luv and Kisses

The Fruity one

KeithP

"...of which your company is a remember."

Que??     

Fruitcake

It means a member again. That's my excuse and I'm sticking to it.