Deception by the sea, GXS Worthing

LoneStarState

Hello again.

The registered keeper received the following NTK with a number of additional images covering a roughly 5 minute period:


The vehicle was temporarily stopped at the location to pick up a food delivery from a nearby outlet.  On returning to the vehicle the driver saw an individual in a GXS shirt (driver also has further description of attendant which will be given in appeal) who was taking photos of a sign who then approached them.

Discussion ensued with the following content:
"Is that your car"
"Yes it is"
"Ok I'll throw this ticket away then (gestures to yellow NTD), I haven't put it through, I'll cancel the information.  In the future if you need to stop here to pick up food, if you go slightly further down the road, they don't patrol those slots/areas so you can stop down there"  There was some discussion afterward that isn't relevant.

Driver left to continue with food deliveries. Driver spoke via phone with relatives the next day to relay the exchange which both relatives would be able to confirm in writing.

Of course we've now arrived at this juncture, and I was not surprised to see the keeper had received this NTK regardless of the assurances of the attendant to the driver at the time.

In this instance I have a question, is it worth identifying the driver in the first instance as a first hand witness so that this can be presented immediately on the first appeal so GXS are aware from the get go about this interaction? I'm also thinking a formal complaint if GXS do not address the allegation and ultimately an SAR to see if there are any breadcrumbs in the ticket audit trail.

NTK looks POFA compliant hence why I am suggesting the above angle of attack.  Any feedback welcome.

Also if anyone knows off-hand the landowner of the Bedford Row pay and display, let me know.  I will look to find out in the meantime.

Coupon-mad

Have you informed that driver - main tip for going forward - not to use private car parks in Worthing?  There's no need.  I'm a West Sussex lady and I never use private land when I visit Worthing - and certainly not for brief stops!  That's what the kerb is for.

It will always be NCP, GXS or OPS. Avoid ex-clamper territory like the plague.

There was no reason to leave the street.  They could have pulled over anywhere, even on a double yellow line & not got a PCN.

All the streets would have been free at 6pm in Worthing.  I know Worthing a bit but where's Bedford Row? Broadwater?

I know of 4 West Sussex people with Trace Debt Recovery demands for GXS (all totally ignored) and no court claims. Some are years old.  Ignore.

No trying the IAS.

LoneStarState

Hi CM

Agreed, no intention trying IAS.  CBA to have to retype into the appeal box just for a generic blanket rejection.

The location in question:
https://www.google.com/maps/@50.8109446,-0.3686813,3a,75y,54.98h,79.12t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soUuC6Cp6vXSAxE6vCMd8Gg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

Coupon-mad

Oh I recall that place. @ParkingMad and I have helped people with PCNs there.  One of those car parks along there was infested by OPS I think.  A solicitor's one.

That and OPS scam sites are the very last place you'd enter in Worthing!

I've no idea why so many drivers think "I must look for a car park" to park a car... it's like people are taught wrongly by driving instructors who (I think) let drivers down and fail to tell people what double yellows are for. Sigh!

LoneStarState

Update on this.

Appeal submitted. GXS responded next day first thing in the morning with zero response to the content of the appeal, didn't even trot out the usual "your comments have been noted" etc. Denied of course.

A complaint will be drafted just to keep the evidence trail alive and keep them slightly busy with an escalation to the IPC just to go through the motions.  Will try and find out landowner also.

Out of interest does anyone have any contact emails for queries/complaints to the IPC?  Their website conveniently doesn't have this info unlike the BPA.

KeithP

LoneStarState said:

Out of interest does anyone have any contact emails for queries/complaints to the IPC?  Their website conveniently doesn't have this info unlike the BPA.

Really?

At the top of the home page on their website is this button...

Towards the bottom of that Motorist Advice webpage there is this button...

Coupon-mad

But it is pointless.

In my/our experience, and according to all accounts reported here, you won't get any of the IPC lot showing what we would perceive as any real respect for motorist complaints.

IMHO they'll spout their ingrained consumer-blame culture laughable crap. They've shown themselves to be especially good at that: e.g. the 'performance' in front of the DLUHC Select Committee in 2021.

Anyhoo, none of the GXS cases I've helped West Sussex locals (people I know personally) to ignore over recent years have gone to a court claim. Just threatograms. Hot air.

LoneStarState

At the top of the home page on their website is this button...

Towards the bottom of that Motorist Advice webpage there is this button...

Thanks.

Apologies. Will admit I didn't click that as I (wrongfully) assumed it would link to "information" similar to the "obligations of the motorist" spiel they give in their CoP.

Coupon-mad said:

In my/our experience, and according to all accounts reported here, you won't get any of the IPC lot showing what we would perceive as any real respect for motorist complaints.

IMHO they'll spout their ingrained consumer-blame culture laughable crap. They've shown themselves to be especially good at that: e.g. the 'performance' in front of the DLUHC Select Committee in 2021.

Anyhoo, none of the GXS cases I've helped West Sussex locals (people I know personally) to ignore over recent years have gone to a court claim. Just threatograms. Hot air.

I agree it will probably come to nothing.  But it allows the allegations of the lying operative to be presented multiple times without any (likely) substantive rebuttal to that specific aspect of the complaint.  It's specifically in the CoP re not misleading drivers to incur PCNs along with other points to make that they will also (likely) not substantially address.  I would also look to complain to the landowner once identified to add another part to the information web.

Agreed court is highly unlikely but it's just to have all the info early on proving the consumer tried to narrow the issues.  Currently awaiting their specific KADOE contract from the DVLA also.

LoneStarState

Small update:

Complaint sent to GXS. No response/acknowledgement received.  Follow up reminder restating the body of complaint sent 6 weeks later with no response received.
Debt collector nonsense form Trace in the form of emails and letters received then all quiet. 
Debt collector nonsense from Moorside received at the very start of January with LBC received more recently.
LBC reply sent.

On receiving LBC, complaint sent to IPC.  IPC forced a hastily cobbled together response packed full of spelling and grammatical errors from GXS but other than that, were (as expected) useless.

The complaint response was useful however as they admit the operative made note of the motorist returning to the vehicle and confirmed that a physical NTD had been "printed".  It begs the question why the NTD was never handed to the driver nor affixed to the car.  Of course I suspect I know why.  Give the motorist the impression that there was no ticket issued based on express assurances and conduct by the operative and weaken evidence gathering ability prior to the shock of an NTK in the post a number of days later.

In addition to being a CoP breach prematurely issuing an NTK when an NTD was issued but deliberately witheld from the motorist would also be a breach of the KADOE correct? No NTK should have been issued for another 29 days at least?

Moorside have responded but awaiting full sight of what they have sent in the way of documentation. Joke outfit