Appeal can't be looked at until driver is named

Reply to both the BPA and DVLA again, reiterating this and attaching the proof:

So, the BPA is asking for the correspondence that shows a violation of the code of practice. I assume it is this specific part;

"if we have not been informed of the drivers details within seven days we will not accept your appeal and pursue you for the full charge"

State that the words: ''we will not accept your appeal'' without the driver's details, is misleading at best and in no way suggests that they will consider the appeal and issue a POPLA code, which it should make clear. At the moment, you are still completely in the dark as to whether this AOS member is considering the keeper's appeal at all.

Wait till this Thursday, then if no rejection letter/POPLA code has arrived, then their 35 days is up and so I would then reply to the BPA:



Dear Emma-Louise/Thomas/Joanne (or whoever fobbed you off)!

Thankyou for your reply, which - typically, going by other BPA replies to complaints about private parking firms, that are in the public domain recently - fails to address the issue and misleads me with erroneous excuses. The BPA should be ashamed of the industry you prop up, who have been getting steadily worse and more aggressive, since clamping was banned, not better.

Anyway, regarding my formal complaint, this matter is NOT resolved.

To reiterate, your AOS member has refused to entertain an appeal from the keeper AT ALL and the requisite 35 days has now passed for them to send me a POPLA code. Now please take the action you should have done earlier, and kindly stop suggesting that an AOS member can actually 'refuse to accept' (i.e. the implication being, refuse to consider at all) a keeper's appeal.

I remind you that on 16/8/17 their email said quite rudely, that they:

"cannot accept the appeal sent in as the driver's identity was not provided".

The letter then states, in bold (angrily and unprofessionally), "According to BPA, section 9.2, the driver must USE THE APPEALS PROCEDURES IN AN HONEST WAY".

How dare they, and how dare you support this unprofessional conduct?

I have copied in Mr Dunford at the DVLA, who along with your colleague Steve Clark, has recently ordered an investigation regarding another case where an AOS member has tried to pretend a keeper cannot appeal. You may not have been in the BPA in 2012 when the POFA came in but Mr Clark was, and is aware that 'keeper liability' only came into play (well after 1st October 2012) once the Government was satisfied that an independent appeals system for keepers was in place.

AOS members were also subsequently reminded by Mr Clark and Mr Dunford in a joint communication, that appeal responses were not allowed to say that an appeal depends upon the driver being named. Such misinformation was identified in 2013 as a 'serious breach' of the Code of Practice. Nothing has changed.

You are wrong to add the bit shown in brackets; it seems that you have been listening to the wrong side for too long, or the BPA team requires refresher training on this specific point. It is embarrassing that such erroneous replies as this are being sent to the general public by the BPA:

''If no appeal (containing a name and serviceable address for the driver) or payment is received by the operator within 28 days, the operator may request the vehicle Keeper details from the DVLA, and issue a Notice to Keeper.''

You are incorrect and misleading in your reply.

This is the same ''significant breach'' as it always was, in any case where an AOS member said in 2012, or in 2017, that considering an appeal was dependent upon the driver being named. That was not allowed then, and is not allowed now.

Kindly open an investigation into the matter - Mr Clark and Mr Dunford are now copied in.

yours,

you


Emails to copy in this time:

david.dunford@dvla.gsi.gov.uk

and

steve.c@britishparking.co.uk

and

copy in your MP, or forward a copy of the email trail and explain the issue!

Put your phone away, may not be evidence in court, did you tell them you are recording the call?