Minster Baywatch - Thruscross Reservoir - Letter before claim

Castle

The problem, (for Minster Baywatch), is that, the contract is being offered by Bransby Wilson Parking Solutions Ltd.

And talking of problems, the car park is subject to Byelaws:
yorkshire_water-reservoir-byelaws.pdf

Umkomaas

Castle said:

The problem, (for Minster Baywatch), is that, the contract is being offered by Bransby Wilson Parking Solutions Ltd.

And talking of problems, the car park is subject to Byelaws:
yorkshire_water-reservoir-byelaws.pdf

So while the NtK has all the PoFA compliant wording, it cannot be compliant if byelaws are in place. They insisting that the registered keeper is liable is a lie designed to extract money from you (with some degree of menace). Make a complaint to the DVLA - you need to be attacking this on all fronts urgently. 

ccrt@dvla.gov.uk

KADOEservice.support@dvla.gov.uk

Send the same complaint to both. 

Car1980

Weird. Theroretically a contract could be constructed where you pay Bransby and you agree a contract with both together, but you'd have difficulty with non-payment scenarios because there would be no consideration flowing from Minster.

Here, Minster have just put their contract away from the payment area and signage, which is an enforceability red flag even if they're the same company.

Minster's sign doesn't actually state the reason for any charge. It's just some instructions followed by the words "Parking Charge £50". There can't be any breach for non-payment because of lack of consideration, even if it was sufficient to form a contract. And if it's a simple agreement, it's unenforceable since it's basically hidden away

1505grandad

Perhaps even a copy of the telephone conversation they probably have?

northernbeardfactory

Umkomaas said:

Have you gone back to YorkshireWater and ask why they've reneged on their promise to 'sort it'?  Go back, tell them you're being sued and you want to have them as a Witness at a forthcoming court hearing. Ask them to name the individual, position and any dates of unavailability to attend for the next 6 months.  Can encourage focus!

I have and they've dodged the question and keep referring me back to Minster Baywatch. I've emailed them again and copied their CEO with those two questions!

northernbeardfactory

Umkomaas said:

The parking contract is with 'Bransby Wilson', not Minster Baywatch. While they are 'sister' companies, one is not the other, nor vice versa!   Has been their downfall previously at the court stage, and will be the prime line of defence should you get that far. 

Do a forum search on 'Bransby Wilson' and read previous cases. Make sure you select 'Newest', not 'Most relevant'. 

I will do this now, thank you

northernbeardfactory

Umkomaas said:

Castle said:

The problem, (for Minster Baywatch), is that, the contract is being offered by Bransby Wilson Parking Solutions Ltd.

And talking of problems, the car park is subject to Byelaws:
yorkshire_water-reservoir-byelaws.pdf

So while the NtK has all the PoFA compliant wording, it cannot be compliant if byelaws are in place. They insisting that the registered keeper is liable is a lie designed to extract money from you (with some degree of menace). Make a complaint to the DVLA - you need to be attacking this on all fronts urgently. 

ccrt@dvla.gov.uk

KADOEservice.support@dvla.gov.uk

Send the same complaint to both. 

Is there a templated letter I need to use for such a complaint to DVLA?

Coupon-mad

northernbeardfactory said:

Coupon-mad said:

Even more reason to see all the signs. 

Some signs photos from last night... No mention of Minster Baywatch on most...





Any problems with these?

Umkomaas said:

Castle said:

The problem, (for Minster Baywatch), is that, the contract is being offered by Bransby Wilson Parking Solutions Ltd.

And talking of problems, the car park is subject to Byelaws:
yorkshire_water-reservoir-byelaws.pdf

So while the NtK has all the PoFA compliant wording, it cannot be compliant if byelaws are in place. They insisting that the registered keeper is liable is a lie designed to extract money from you (with some degree of menace). Make a complaint to the DVLA - you need to be attacking this on all fronts urgently. 

ccrt@dvla.gov.uk

KADOEservice.support@dvla.gov.uk

Send the same complaint to both. 

Is there a templated letter I need to use for such a complaint to DVLA?

No there isn't. We hate templates!

Umkomaas

northernbeardfactory said:

Umkomaas said:

Castle said:

The problem, (for Minster Baywatch), is that, the contract is being offered by Bransby Wilson Parking Solutions Ltd.

And talking of problems, the car park is subject to Byelaws:
yorkshire_water-reservoir-byelaws.pdf

So while the NtK has all the PoFA compliant wording, it cannot be compliant if byelaws are in place. They insisting that the registered keeper is liable is a lie designed to extract money from you (with some degree of menace). Make a complaint to the DVLA - you need to be attacking this on all fronts urgently. 

ccrt@dvla.gov.uk

KADOEservice.support@dvla.gov.uk

Send the same complaint to both. 

Is there a templated letter I need to use for such a complaint to DVLA?

Flash up your draft complaint here and you'll get feedback to help sharpen it up. Cover the points, but keep it brief, not War and Peace!

doubledotcom

Here is a template with instructions on how to make a DVLA complaint:

• Go to: https://contact.dvla.gov.uk/complaints
• Select: “Making a complaint or compliment about the Vehicles service you have received”
• Enter your personal details, contact details, and vehicle details
• Use the text box to summarise your complaint or insert a covering note
• You will then be able to upload a file (up to 19.5 MB) — this can be your full complaint or supporting evidence

That’s it.

The DVLA is required to record, investigate and respond to every complaint about a private parking company. If everyone who encounters a breach took the time to submit a complaint, we might finally see the DVLA take meaningful action—whether that means curtailing or removing KADOE access altogether.

For the text part of the complaint the webform could use the following:

I am submitting a formal complaint against [INSERT PPC NAME], an [INSERT IPC or BPA] AOS member with DVLA KADOE access, for breaching the BPA/IPC Private Parking Single Code of Practice (PPSCoP) after obtaining my personal data.

While the Operator may have had reasonable cause at the time of their KADOE request, their subsequent misuse of my data—through conduct that contravenes the PPSCoP—renders that use unlawful. The PPSCoP forms an integral part of the DVLA’s governance framework for data access by private parking firms. Continued access is conditional on compliance.

The DVLA, as data controller, is obliged under UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018 to investigate and take enforcement action when data is misused following release. This complaint is not about whether the data was obtained lawfully at the outset, but whether its subsequent use breached the terms under which it was provided.

I have prepared a supporting statement setting out the nature of the breach and the Operator’s actions, and I request a full investigation into this matter. I have attached the supporting document.
Please acknowledge receipt and confirm the reference number for this complaint.

Then you could upload the following as a PDF file for the formal complaint itself:

SUPPORTING STATEMENT

Complaint to DVLA – Breach of KADOE Contract and PPSCoP

Operator name: [INSERT PPC NAME]
Date of PCN issue: [INSERT DATE]
Vehicle registration: [INSERT VRM]

I am submitting this complaint to report a misuse of my personal data by [INSERT PPC NAME], who obtained my keeper details from the DVLA under the KADOE (Keeper At Date Of Event) contract.

Although the parking company may have had reasonable cause to request my data initially, the way they have used that data afterwards amounts to unlawful processing. This is because they have acted in breach of the BPA/IPC Private Parking Single Code of Practice (PPSCoP), which is a mandatory requirement for access to DVLA keeper data. The PPSCoP forms part of the framework that regulates how parking companies must behave once they have received keeper data from the DVLA.

The KADOE contract makes clear that keeper data may only be used to pursue an unpaid parking charge in line with the Code of Practice. If a parking company fails to comply with the PPSCoP after receiving DVLA data, their use of that data becomes unlawful, as they are no longer using it for a permitted purpose.

In this case, [INSERT PPC NAME] has breached the PPSCoP in the following ways:

[INSERT A SHORT SUMMARY OF THE BREACH(ES), e.g. failure to follow grace periods, misleading notices, refusal to engage with a complaint, pursuing a charge despite having evidence of disability or mitigation, etc.]

These are not minor or technical breaches. They show a clear disregard for the standards required under the current single Code. As a result, the operator is no longer entitled to use the keeper data they obtained from the DVLA, because the purpose for which it was provided (a fair and lawful pursuit of a charge under the Code) no longer applies.

The DVLA remains the Data Controller for the data it releases under KADOE, and is therefore responsible for ensuring that personal data is not misused by third parties. This includes taking action against AOS operators who breach the conditions under which the data was provided. I am therefore asking the DVLA to investigate this breach and to take appropriate action under the terms of the KADOE contract.

This may include:

• Confirming that a breach has occurred
  
• Taking enforcement action against the operator
  
• Suspending or terminating their KADOE access if warranted

I have attached relevant supporting material with this statement. Please confirm receipt and provide a reference for this complaint. I am also happy to provide further information if required.

Name: [INSERT YOUR NAME]
Date: [INSERT DATE]