Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'ppc'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • The Consumer Forums: The Mall
    • Welcome to the Consumer Forums
    • FAQs
    • Forum Rules - Please read before posting
    • Consumer Forums website - Post Your Questions & Suggestions about this site
    • Campaign
    • Helpful Organisations
  • CAG Community centre
    • CAG Community Centre Subforums:-
  • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
    • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
  • CAG Library - you need to register to access the CAG library
    • CAG library Subforums
  • Banks, Loans & Credit
    • Bank and Finance Subforums:
    • Other Institutions
  • Retail and Non-retail Goods and Services
  • Work, Social and Community
  • Debt problems - including homes/ mortgages, PayDay Loans
  • Motoring
  • Legal Forums
  • Latest Consumer News

Blogs

  • A Say in the Life of .....
  • Debt Diaries
  • Shopping & Money Saving Tips
  • chilleddrivingtuition

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


About Me


Quit Date

Between and

Cigarettes Per Day


Cost Per Day


Location

Found 36 results

  1. If you have had a success against any of the PPC's then post a link to your thread here.
  2. any advise welcome. I received a PCN from a PPC. I appealed to them and got standard "get lost" template response In this appeal I told the PPC to stop processing my private data as they had obtained it unlawfully from the DVLA due to the non compliance of POFA, BPA CoP and DVLA contract. I appealed on fact that PCN not PoFA compliant, not BPA CoP compliant and single sign with t&cs was not visible. then Appealed to POPLA on above points and many others such as no contract, etc, etc POPLA upheld my appeal without addressing any of the points except the first one of not PoFa compliant. wrote to PPC and told them again to stop processing my data and confirm within 21 days removed from their systems. no response from them. I have now issued small claims for the damages I suffered - petrol to go visit the site to photograph the sign and layout, stamps, envelopes, parking to post, electricity usage on computer, etc in amount to £400. plus £400 damages for distress under DPA. They are defending saying they had "reasonable cause" to obtain my private data and that Section 35(1) of the DPA applies which allows the DVLA and the PPC to process the data due to the Road Vehicles Regulations Act 2002 27(1)(e). Besides the fact that I think that the definition of reasonable cause by the DVLA is arbitary as they change the definition whenever they see fit and its not defined in legislation and therefore does not meet the requirements of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights(another whole story ongoing with the ICO for 4 months now!), I believe the PPC is not allowed to process my private data under the Section 35(1) exemption of the DPA, in my opinion, taking the Supreme Court case in The Christian Institute and others (Appellants) v The Lord Advocate (Respondent) (Scotland) into account: http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/uk/cases/UKSC/2016/51.html&query=("section+35") Paragraphs 56 and 57 are the most relevant. the reasonable cause provision under Road Vehicles Regulations Act 2002 27(1)(e) is not a statutory obligation and so does not meet the DPA Schedule 2 requirements.(para 57) And paras 3 and 5 of Schedule 2 of the DPA also do not allow the release of private data to the PPC due to the fact that the PPC is not processing the data as a function of a statutory duty. This is also subject of a complaint with the ICO. (para 56) any other thoughts or points I can use to ensure judgement goes my way?
  3. Had a note from Royal Mail regarding and item of mail that had unpaid postage by sender .and RM wanted £2 for unpaid postage to deliver. My suspicions were raised as the note used almost my full name, so I sat on it until the 18 day deadline for the item to RTS Had to visit the delivery office this morning to collect a couple of other items , and the postie allowed me sight of the letter awaiting me to shell out £2 for delivery. Surprise Surprise the letter bares all the hallmarks of being from a PPC , window envelope , no return address on the back ,my full name as if lifted from DVLA and the appearance of a printed form .And I do have a slight suspicion of where it might refer to , I was working in and outlet centre and might have strayed over the limit of 5 hrs . So I left RM to RTS , I have the drop card regarding unpaid postage , so am able to keep a time line . Let the fun begin
  4. ElectricW

    NHS PPC Fraud!

    Everyone please be aware of a NHS FRAUD which they say is "legal" and there is no defence! For many years I have had an NHS PPC (pre payment card) for my regular prescriptions. I was not aware that on my 60th Birthday, I would no longer have to pay for prescriptions... But the NHS did, and so in their kindness CANCELLED my PPC arrangement PRIOR to my Birthday (they say they will do this if your renewal is less than 9 months from your birthday). They say they wrote to me in Feb - but I did not see any letter from them them until April / May! They say they "wrote to me". Now have to pay for the prescription I collected a few days between the expiry of my card and my 60th Birthday, plus £100.80 fine! I accept paying the £16 or so for the prescription, however I feel that the £100.80 PENALTY payment required on top is out of all proportion to the event that they themselves engineered! Even if they did write to me to inform me - they made no attempt to confirm that I had been notified - but they say there is no defence: I signed to say I had a valid PPC when I did not (because THEY cancelled it, NOT me!), therefore I commited Fraud! Please be aware of this NHS fraud and do not get trapped! I am still arguing with them - but they say there are no grounds and I must pay. If I commited Fraud, it is because they created the situation! Is this another way of raising money for the NHS?
  5. https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2017-03-21/debates/382789C8-0168-4C4B-8260-0540AF83C7D3/DVLAAndPrivateCarParkingCompanies Kevin Foster:"We got rid of the cowboy clampers in the last Parliament. The suspicion is that the cowboy clampers have now become the cowboy finers and cowboy invoicers."
  6. Hi all, Looking for some advice regarding a parking charge received in an NCP car park for having an expired ticket. I park there every weekday for work, I pay for 2 hours as I'm in the office usually for about an hour before heading out again, but on this day I was delayed leaving and returned 20 minutes after it had expired to find one of their lovely bogus charges. I received the ticket stuck to my windscreen, with the time of year and seemingly countless work and personal life issues I didn't get round to writing an appeal. The Notice to Keeper arrived in due course and I haven't responded to that either, most recently I received a Keeper Liability Notice stating that it is now too late to appeal and they will pass the matter to a debt collection agency who may take me to court if I don't pay up. Now I'm not worried about their scare tactics, but I've reached the point where I have room in my brain's limited attention span to deal with this What would be the best course of action at this point? I understand that I was at fault but they're asking for £100 which is ludicrous, and I know they cannot charge more than the amount of lost revenue for the car park owner. Should I write to them offering payment equivalent to 1 hour's parking to cover the lost revenue? Thanks in advance, Nick
  7. Hello All, A 'PPC' who's identity shall remain undisclosed for the time being, I've had all the letters from them also letters from the 'pet debt collectors' now it has gone down the route of their 'Solicitors ' This where it gets interesting the 'Solicitors ' have been sending the letters to my old address , I then had two at my new address, I have been back to my old address ( It was my Fathers before he passed away) Lo and behold I have a MCOL from them to my old address with them knowing full well my new address, I have acknowledged the MCOL Claim as per the great advice seen on hear, Now my question is bearing in mind that my job takes me away all week and also I am in no way legally trained, But my feeling is,have they left themselves open to a investigation by the Police ? I feel that this is very underhanded it could have left me with a Default CCJ which is a big no no in my job, thoughts please Anon55
  8. Not really into conspircy theories etc but it seems strange that a decision was given against Beavis with PE winning the court case especially as PE is owned by Capita and Capita is really cosy with the government who pays judges to make decisions. I wonder if some one somewhere helped the judge to make the decision that affects consumers?
  9. http://leaderlive.co.uk/news/153109/parking-enforcer-swaps-sides-to-fight-penalties.aspx it's absolutely disgusting that he STILL profits off the misfortune of drivers that got caught out by PPC's. More so that the local media is actually advertising his business.
  10. Missus got 'just the ticket' from euro in a hospital car park today for 'Not Parked In Marked Bay'. She believed she was well within a bay - other cars similarly parked, and a (faded) white line behind the car. I'm the registered keeper, and she's a named driver on our insurance policy. I'm not totally up to speed with current protocols. Do I 'appeal' straight away to invoke POPLA procedure, or await NTK from them? If this needs to become a separate thread, by all means do your stuff. And thx in advance for any help in putting this one to rest. FYI, last time I got a speculative invoice from them in almost identical circumstances (c. 2-3 yrs ago), I just ignored it. Didn't hear so much as a pipsqueak from them. Nothing. Nada. Zip. Zilch. Not even a threatening letter. I was devastated.
  11. Hello, Just before christmas 2013 I got a parking charge notice put on my windscreen after parking in an allocated parking space for a small industrial unit that was unoccupied (To Let signs up, chained up doors). The site was approximately 15 small adjoined units built around a car park with about 50 spaces, each unit having a number of allocated spots. I believed that as the unit was not in use, nobody would even notice, let alone care if I parked there for 10 minutes. The space was not directly outside the unit and I was not blocking any access. The car park was only about half full and I saw no UKCPS signs whatsoever when I parked. After returning to my car and realising that where I had parked was the domain of a private parking company I had a look for some signs and found one approximately 8 ft (maybe higher) up on a wall of an industrial unit opposite, facing the entrance to the car park (not visible from where I had parked, and not readable or even particularly noticeable to drivers when entering the car park). A few years back a friend of mine had been issued one of these tickets, ignored it and never heard anything again, so at the time I just drove off, not unduly worried. It turns out the car park for the industrial units was owned by Co-op, although separated from the actual nearby co-op car park by a canal and a fence (no signs to show that the co-op also owned that land at all) I ignored the letters they sent (I realise now this was out of date advice), and after 3 or 4 I heard nothing more for many months until a County Court Claim Form arrived this morning for £175. Unfortunately, I did not take any photos at the time as I was not think that UKCPS would actually chase me. The site has now been bulldozed to make way for a new road. Given that my main defence seems to be inadequate signs and I have no photographic evidence of that, are there any other good avenues of defence I should use in addition? Thanks in advance, t
  12. Having used this forum in the old days of ignore, I am trying to assist a friend with the new PFoA rules The reg keeper has just received a final demand, they categorically state that this is the first letter they have received. it's dated 26/11/2014 and franked 02/12 sanitized copy attached, any advice would be welcome on the next steps to take
  13. I was surfing on Scoop (http://www.scoop.it/t/lacef-news) today and come across this story your thoughts please especially the final few words Automatic number plate recognition allows cameras to read car number plates. Invented in Britain in the 1970s, its use by police was followed up by private car park operators who use it because cameras do all the work. Fewer, if any, attendants are needed. Cameras are linked to computers which recognise numbers and letters on a plate, check cars coming into a car park and then recognise it when it leaves. If the driver has not paid, or the car has been in the car park longer than allowed, the operator sends the number to the DVLA which will send on the details of the owner’s address to the operator. The operator will send out a penalty notice – which is unofficial but carries a similar name to the statutory penalty charge notices sent out by councils – demanding a fine be paid. But it is illegal for councils to use it because the system is deemed to be unreliable. Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2960986/Thousands-rip-parking-fines-dished-town-hall-car-parks-illegally-using-automatic-number-plate-recognition.html#ixzz3Sf67bGQH " The BIG question here is that in purple, I am wondering if this argument can be used in the PPC area of law, simple because the law MUST BE EQUAL in ALL aspects.
  14. Hi all I'm aware this has been talked about a lot here but just need some confirmation. I got a PCN on Saturday (6th December) in the Staples/Maplin car park in Leicester. Didn't see any signs telling me about rules etc but they were probably there. The reasons for my PCN states reasons '1' and '6': 1 - "Unauthorised Parking" and 6 - "Did not use Car Park Providers Premises and went elsewhere at the time of issue of the parking charge notice" I did actually go into Maplins and have a receipt to prove it. the time of my receipt says 13:06 but the PCN was issued at 14:30 so I guess I must have parked too long. Am I right in thinking that the reason that says "Did not use Car Park Providers Premises and went elsewhere at the time of issue of the parking charge notice" is actually invalid since I did actually use the store and can prove so? There is an option '7' that says: "USED Car Park Providers Premises and went elsewhere at the time of issue of the parking charge notice", which would have been accurate but this isn't the reason they gave ... invalidating the ticket.. right? Do I have decent grounds for appeal? Should I just wait for the NTK like is often advised on these forums? Thanks
  15. New thread for discussing (possible) PPC signage and website non compliance with the Companies Act 2006. I've asked that a couple of posts be moved here from another thread, and we can then continue the discussion without hijacking another thread
  16. Taxpayers are spending up to £600,000 a year to subsidise the cost of private parking firms getting drivers’ details from the DVLA so they can fine motorists. And that total subsidy pot may have topped £5million over the last eight years. New figures obtained from a Freedom of Information request reveal that the DVLA loses 34p every time a parking company applies for the details of a car’s registered keeper. The subsidy arises because the private firms pay £2.50 for documentation, which costs the DVLA £2.84 to handle. This year the agency has received 1.8million applications from private companies, costing the public purse around £612,000. Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/cars/article-2593596/Parking-firms-requests-drivers-details-cost-taxpayer-600k-year.html#ixzz2xjeRUCzi
  17. Good morning everyone, In the small town where I live with have a branch of a quite famous german supermarket (with Parking eye cameras) and two other supermarkets both with their own PPC's. I have recently helped a couple of people defend Parking Eye, speculative Invoices with 100% success, However, I would like to setup all three companies and detail the process of getting the charges dropped in the local media, My idea is this: 1. Overstay the Parking Eye park and get an Invoice, also double dip this park with witnesses present to record me times of arrival and departure, so that their First in, Last out ANPR flaw is exposed. 2 Overstay the other two car parks and show how to get these invoices dropped in the media also...... While I appreciate that parking cannot be a "free for all", I resent the fact that these quasi-legal rackets are scaring people with little money out of their cash! Opinions please? Cheers Matt
  18. Hi, please be gentle with me, if I am asking stupid questions. I had an accident in May 2013, which resulted in my having to cease payments for some time with MBNA, they put me on 0% for the time, I then started to make payments as agreed and remain on 0% due to ill health I noted that they sent me a letter stating PPC had been cancelled dated after my accident, I didn't even know I had it, but started asking for further information, they initially said they could't tell me the date months and months of going backwards and forwards, they have sent me all the communications associated with my account. the PPC was cancelled on the 30/12/04 last payment taken 22/12/04 I have looked at the system sheets for that date, no mention of a cancellation there are no more PPC payments taken though after 22/12/04 Surely they can't just cancel it and have no evidence? also the forms you sign to say you agree to T&C when taking out the Credit Card, (2003), is it a tick box to say I decline or a tick box to say I accept PPC? Does anyone have a form for this year and could tell me it would be helpful. Can MBNA just cancel this with no proof, why would they write to me after my accident in May 2013 to say it was cancelled if it was cancelled in December 2004? I am so confused did i sign up for PPC, the wording on the T& C is all blurred , I have asked them the question, but they have not answered that particular question thanks in advance
  19. Rarely audited, rarely inspected – no wonder private car parks are a rip-off [8 April 2013] The woeful level of inspection of signage at car parks has been laid bare by an admission from the British Parking Association that its annual audit of 163 private parking members includes a mandatory minimum of only ONE car park being inspected per member. So of the roughly 17,000 private car parks in the UK, all festooned with signs and markings, it’s quite possible that only about 200 are ever seen by the BPA’s supposedly independent external scrutineers, who have admitted to Plain Language Commission in the past that they have little or no specialist knowledge of readability or legibility. The BPA told us last week: ‘We do not and cannot keep close tabs on every private car park managed by a BPA member but we currently carry out as many audits as we possibly can within a self-regulatory framework. We audit every Approved Operator[‘]s entire business model every year in addition to inspecting a minimum of one car park, managed by each operator annually. The car park is chosen at random so that the operator cannot know in advance which one we will be inspecting.’ The BPA’s lack of ‘close tabs’ was confirmed by its staff member Peter Beasley who told one concerned motorist: ‘We are not in a position to visit the thousand of ... member car parks and check all the signage.’ Funny that, because the BPA delights in telling aggrieved drivers all about its stringent inspection regime, and its battle cry is ‘raising standards’. Naturally the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA), the government agency in business partnership with the BPA, swallows whole the BPA’s 'high standards’ rhetoric. It’s emerged from a Freedom of Information enquiry that the DVLA, which releases details of two million drivers a year to BPA members so that they can be chased for payment of penalties, visits these members to audit them not once every six months, not once every year, not once every two years, but once every three years. So this whole enormous so-called ‘industry’ – which produces little but anguish and misery across the country as it chases drivers for £160million in penalties every year on the basis of very dodgy signage – is not only unregulated but virtually uninspected by the organizations that make money out of it. Consumer campaigner and ex-Fraud Squad detective Nev Metson says he has yet to come across a single private parking ticket that complies with the Protection of Freedoms Act, which came into force on 1 October 2012. Unless the tickets – often demanding £100 – comply, the companies cannot enforce them in the courts and the DVLA has no legal basis for releasing registered-keeper data to them. (Yes, the Government is probably breaking the Data Protection Act again.) It looks increasingly as if the entire private parking industry is based on a massive bluff. Why do Trading Standards departments sit back and do nothing as consumers continue to be fleeced by companies equipped with little more than surveillance cameras, a nice line in aggressive letter-writing, and enough brass neck to start a foundry? http://www.clearest.co.uk/news/2013/4/8/Rarely%20audited%20rarely%20inspected%20no%20wonder%20private%20car%20parks%20are%20a%20ripoff?page=2
  20. I got an invoice from a PPC, I was looking forward to making them pay a POPLA fee so I sent an appeal to the PPC claiming there was no valid contract and they wrote back saying they will not be chasing anymore and will write it off.
  21. Hello, RK has a PPC taking them to court, all initial correspondance was ignored until court papers dropped on the mat of the RK. The infringement is vehicle using disabled bay without blue badge however passengers in the vehicle were disabled. A defence has been suggested to submit re: HMRC v VCS as it is unlikely PPC has it in contract permission to prosecute on landowners behalf. No evidence (cctv or otherwise) has been seen by defendant yet so no proof of driver etc. No admittance of who was driving has been made by RK. RK is slightly concerned due to lack of experience in county court, not sure how to present case, not sure if the defence submitted is enough evidence to have claim struck out. Advice would be helpful and any points of law or suggestions to add to defence is appreciated. Thankyou
  22. I have noticed that up to now the general advice for a ticket from any of these is to ignore and since last October not much has changed apart from the provision of an appeals process via POPLA - although any decision made is not binding on the motorist. If however eeveryone challenged their tickets - I accept what we see here is the minority - with the insistence of taking it to POPLA. let us examine a few scenarios. 1 - lets say 300 people write in and appeal to the PPC's better nature and are all turned down, The cost to the PPC at this stage is the cost of stationery and postage - cost say £150, but also how long will tie themup to keep answering. 2 - each appeal to the PPC is then taken to POPLA - cost £27 - £8100 in total, which they have to pay on a 30 day notice. 3 - the next month follows a similar pattern with no guarantee folks are going to pay Multiply this by say 6 or 7 PPC's and it wouldn't takelong to clog the system up, we already know the PPC's are not the most colourful page in the book and some do not have the staff or resources to keep this up. For me the vote would go to write in rather than ignore from the start, play them at their own game.
  23. Reading through Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 regarding parking, section 7 & 8 refer to a creditor. Can you be a creditor without a credit licence? Would a PPC have a credit licence?
  24. Hi all Would you Adam and Eve it!!!!!!!!!!! Last week I did a job for a customer in our town centre and he contacted the Council's parking control and organized me parking there for the week - No problem right... WRONG Turns out the car park I was in, at a supermarket across the road, is operated by a Private Parking Company. NOT THE FREAKING COUNCIL- so today I received number 2 "speculative invoice" of, what I expect, will be 5 in total...........Don't say it, I know, yes, ok. Shall I follow suit and ignore them all, or do I write individual letters as per the templates suggested on this forum? Thanks in advance!!
  25. Posted by PPCguy on Pepipoo Well guys some of you may know me form on here and MSE. Just come over to report some unrest in the private parking industry. As you know I manage a private parking company. Over the last few days there has been a large deal of unrest coming from some of the smaller companies in the industry over the way they are treated by the BPA and and the way in which this treatment differs from how the big boys are treated, You may or may not be aware of an email from a person at the BPA named Kelvin which is of the following content: As we can see from this email the BPA are directly accusing the operators of not complying with the DVLA'S guidelines. I must mention that following a previous memo from the DVLA to the BPA they were instructed to forward a message to ALL BPA members that keeper liability must not be implied on any signage or document until such legislation has been brought into action. This email was never received by myself and several other operators that i am directly aware of. The above email is in direct response to the DVLA announcing they are reviewing the BPA's conduct. In Case you are not aware ALL BPA members are supposed to be audited every year. This audit covers everything from contracts with landowners to signage and complaints. I am aware of 1 member who has now been suspended from DVLA access by the DVLA (NOT CPS) who was auditied just weeks prior to being suspended for implying keeper liability on the signs. The DVLA guidelines (which im sure would also fall under DPA) state that any initial communication with the registered keeper must make no mention of any charge, offence of amounts but is merely to ascertain the identity of the driver (currently by request not requirement) at the time. This means that ALL notices from the larger ANPR operators are in breach of this guideline as they directly are addressed to the registered keepr and mention all the details of any alleged offence. The BPA are aware of this but still it is allowed. The BPA in their email above have now shifted any blame from them to the operators in their menacing email and also given us 7 days to respond. A call to the DVLA has today confirmed that they are seeking professional advice on the new code and as such the BPA are acting out of turn in this measure as they are enforcing rules and regulations "on behalf of the DVLA" which haven't even been released by the DVAL. This may be a real chance to effect the parking industry in a way which may only make things better. http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=73472
×
×
  • Create New...