Request for peer review - Bristol Airport VCS appeal

KeithP

Harry96339 said:

• They say byelaws are not currently in use which apparently based on previous posts is not true.

What does "byelaws are not currently in use" actually mean?

The simple fact that byelaws are in place is enough to confirm that the place is 'under statutory control' so using PoFA to transfer liability from a driver to a keeper isn't possible.

Fruitcake

Why did the driver receive a rejection? Surely the keeper appealed without identifying the driver.

With regards to your comment, "byelaws are not currently in use," please tell us exactly what they said, then search RRTechie's thread where he quoted response to me from the right honourable MP, John Penrose, concerning VCS's repeated lies about BA Ltd consider byelaws to be obsolete.

Once you have found that, complain to BA Ltd about VCS's repeated lies, and complain to your new MP about the same. Say you are concerned that BA limited is operating an airport in breach of air safety rules, and ask if the CAA are aware of this.

Harry96339

Why did the driver receive a rejection? Surely the keeper appealed without identifying the driver.

"we will continue to pursue this matter on the reasonable assumption that you were the driver of the vehicle on the date in question until information/evidence to the contrary is provided."

With regards to your comment, "byelaws are not currently in use," please tell us exactly what they said

"We note your comment concerning the use of byelaws at the Airport; as already stated the signs at the entrance to the airport clearly identify the roads as private property and byelaws are not currently in use."

Harry96339

@Fruitcake I looked at RRTechie's thread. He never had a response from his MP (see here). Though I found Bristol Airport Ltd's reponse to John Penrose, that you posted:

"Firstly, our Byelaws are definitely in place and are not obsolete. We have of course contacted our third-party parking enforcement provider who have identified an issue with the wording used in the response to the constituent, which does not align with their usual communication standards. The operative used incorrect phrasing with regards to Byelaws in this particular response. Excel Parking Services have assured us that this wording anomaly is not consistent with the response typically used in other communications"

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/80510197/#Comment_80510197

1505grandad

" Excel Parking Services have assured us that this wording anomaly is not consistent with the response typically used in other communications"

So an entirely different entity answered to BA Ltd on behalf of VCS Ltd.?

Fruitcake

You need to complain again to BA Ltd, this time highlighting their repeat of the lie that byelaws are obsolete. BA Ltd have known for around a year about this lie, yet VCS are still spouting it. 

Also complain to VCS and BA Ltd that VCS has shared your personal data with a completely separate company with a completely different registration number at Companies House that does not have a contract with BA Ltd.

You should now also complain to your new MP. I suggest you include the whole of the letter I wrote to John Penrose in its entirety.

Harry96339

Please can someone post the full letter from John Penrose. I have searched thoroughly and cannot find it.

KeithP

This post by @Fruitcake should help... 15 February at 12:57AM

To find that I supplied the search facility with the argument "John Penrose" - the quotes are important - and it returned fifteen results. Then changing the 'Sort By' from 'Best Match' to 'Newest' made it easy to find. 

Fruitcake

Harry96339 said:

Please can someone post the full letter from John Penrose. I have searched thoroughly and cannot find it.

You quoted the link to my post that includes the letter I wrote to the Right Hon John Penrose MP, and the reply I got from him, in your post on this thread on the 11th of July at 7.21pm that you then edited at 7.38pm. I'm not sure why you cannot now find it.

Harry96339

Apologies, I thought that snippet was a small part of a much bigger response from John, but it seems that was pretty much it.