Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • No you're not doomed. It's a shame you covered up the dates and times on your PCN since they can possibly help your case when they don't comply with the requirements of the rules in private car parks. Could you please therefore include the arrival and departure times as well as the date of the offence and the date on which they alleged they sent you the PCN. The PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4.since the wording should invite the keeper to pay the outstanding amount. Also I cannot see on the PCN that UKPO are the Creditor though I may have missed it since it is so unusual not to include it. The upshot is that you as keeper are no longer liable to pay the charge if the driver fails to pay within 28 days-0nly the driver is now liable. As Courts [assuming it gets that far ] do not accept that the driver and the keeper are not the same these rogues will have a hard job who was driving unless you appeal or have appealed and revealed who was driving. You did say that you weren't parked there long and had that been correct you have perhaps 15 minutes where you might have had a further. argument. As it judging by the confusing times mentioned in the wording or the PCN you were there for almost an hour? However as the light was not good and I presume the signs were not illuminated that is a reason that you could not see the sign. And did you have your blue badge showing ? Interestingly the post code quoted does not agree with the Post office one in West houghton= BL5 3JS Are there two different Tesco  car parks in Bolton. You obviously could not be in two places at the same time...............
    • Especially because you have bought the car on finance, there is probably quite a lot that you can do although it sounds as if you are maybe taking the appropriate steps anyway. However you need to give as much more information. We need to know – the name of the dealer details of the vehicle, make, model, mileage, age, price paid – 70 8K? The name of the finance company – and some dates. Date purchased, the date that you have logged this with the FOS and I'm sure there will be other questions. I suppose that you don't understand your consumer rights very well because issues like the sunroof et cetera should have been repaired by the dealership and there was no need for you to spend your own money on this. On the basis of what you have told us, I would suggest that eventually should be up to recover all of your money plus the expenses you have incurred in carrying out repairs. And in fact – you could also list out the faults which have manifested themselves so far and the money you have spent on correcting those. You are entitled to purchase a vehicle which is of satisfactory quality remains that way for a reasonable period of time. At £78,000 I wouldn't expect any serious issues to manifest themselves in this vehicle for quite a few years. Tell us also about the £2400 inspection that you have had carried out. Were you advised to do this? To do this of your own initiative? Who carried it out? That lot for a start
    • Hi Dx, I am hoping you have had an opportunity to skim through this thread. Please may I give it a humble bump for your consideration. My last date to present a WS is Wednesday the 17th. Many thanks and kind regards 🙏  
    • Hello I've got a parking ticket, see here... https://ibb.co/DfHqg9F https://ibb.co/QvqH52m https://ibb.co/pbPPdDg https://ibb.co/X2F1X25 I've been parking at a particular corner in a small Tesco car park for years. Recently they put two electric charging plugs, one where that spot is and one at the bay next door, so I stopped using them out of courtesy in case they need to be used (I use that Tesco every day and drive past every day but have yet to see anyone use them). Recently I went back to Tesco when it was reasonably dark. All the bays were full, including the three blue badge bays. I have one but none of the cars parked in the bays did, I noticed as I walked past them (nobody ever gets pulled for that because Tesco have never policed this small car park before). Since there was two free electric bay spaces, and since I wasn't going to be long (just one product), I parked into my former 'regular' spot. There was a notice on the wall but if I'm honest I didn't read it because (a) I'm thick, and (b) I honestly thought it was just telling people how to use the device (like I said, I'm thick) rather than this being a parking fine. I went back during daylight and the sign is very obvious (as you can see from the picture), although not so obvious at night, although probably still obvious enough for you to tell me "tough luck, pal". Now they want £100 or £60 if I pay quickly. Am I doomed?
    • Hi All   After a bit of advice to see where I stand. Bought a car in Sept 2022 on pcp. Been told it had a big inspection and was good to go. Had many issues with it throughout the year including trims coming off the car and sunroof not closing.   While getting the sunroof repaired at month 12, in Sept 2023, the bodyshop guy said your cars been in a bad accident. Garage said it hasn't but offered to take the car back at half of what I paid for it as long as I buy a replacement from them before inspecting it (probably damage control) (car was £78k, said they'd offer £40k "trade in value" as if doing me a favour).   Ended up getting a forensic inspection done for £2400 in Dec 2023, confirmed car was in a bad smash (write off level but unrecorded on hpi) and potentially unsafe to drive - front end is slightly bent towards 1 side, what looks like a hairline crack on the chasis, overspray, bonner with patches of filler all over it, damaged rubbers etc   Raised complaint to finance company and few weeks ago to FOS... just wondering what people's experiences have been like going through the FOS, main thing that concerns me is that it was 12-13 months after I bought the car that I realised what caused these issues and raised the issue to the garage/ finance co but the damage/ misaligned panels are actually visible in the advert photos which I saved thankfully.    Dealership has had my car for 4 weeks to let a few bodyshops look at it (without giving me a courtesy car!!!) Not giving me any updates either because I went to the FOS about it and didnt want to speak to them over the phone anymore as opposed to emails. Note: hanging trim was reported within 3 months but due to part delays it didn't come until like July 2023, within 2 months the piece came off again, claimed under repairers warranty for another replacement 6 weeks ago and within 2 weeks this time the trim is coming off AGAIN (assuming it won't stay on due to the car being actually bent out of shape slightly)   Any idea if I have a good case or if there's anything else I can do?   Thanks
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

The DVLA should be sued under the Data Protection Act


WebFerret
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4586 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

The DVLA are the cause of these Private Parking Company scams trying to extract money from innocent motorists by selling personal and confidential data to individuals with seemingly no background checks whatsoever - The DVLA could easily stop this unsavory activity by denying the information to these companies.

 

Check out the Daily Mail's artical and read the many comments posted:

 

DVLA still selling personal details to cowboy clamping firms | the Daily Mail

 

"The DVLA has sold the names and addresses of nearly 8,000 drivers to clamping and car park companies in just six weeks - despite a Government pledge to crack down on the trade."

" The DVLA charges £2.50 for each piece of data, collecting a £9 million windfall for the Government since 2002."

" Information Commissioner Richard Thomas warned the DVLA back in 2002 that the sale of personal details could be illegal but has done nothing to stop it."

"Over the six-week period, one firm alone, Creative Car Park Management (CCPM), obtained the addresses of 2,746 drivers from DVLA. It has contracts with the Co-op, Kwik Save and Aldi, and demands fines of up to £170."

"A DVLA spokesman said: "The DVLA is extremely serious about protecting driver and vehicle data and has introduced procedures to ensure the system for releasing information examines requests robustly." - standard blurb........it's not happening is it?!

 

In my case the company concerned is Civil Enforcement Limited, registered to a PO Box run by one individual who lives in a very expensive house, has changed the name of his company several times (liquidated), been featured on BBC TV's Watchdog and there are many forum posts about them (complaining) on the net. (not very "robust" in terms of checks then!)

 

And a year or so ago the Daily Mail newspaper discovered that among those given driver details was a firm run by Britain's most notorious clamping thugs, Gordon Miller and Darren Havell, who were serving seven years' jail between them for extorting money from motorists.

 

So what the hell is going on with our Government?

 

Time we people got together and lobbied Parlament to put a stop once and for all to all this extortion & rackiteering thats being fueled by the unsavory (and I believe illegal) actions of our Government.

 

Write to your local MP - Write to Gordon Brown - Write to David Cameron

 

And if there is a legal expert out there on the subject, get in touch with me, cos I would like to persue this to the end and sue the Government for what they are doing (you can tell I'm angered) and get a result for the people. - THIS IS SIMPLY WRONG AND MUST STOP

 

Thank you for your time in reading this thread - together we can do something about this injust treatment of this Governments citizens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I have now written to my local MP as follows:

 

Dear .............

 

I hope you can help - I have just been a victim of the well known

private parking company [problem] in receiving notice to pay money for an

alleged offence. The DVLA have evidently supplied my details to this

(rouge - as confirmed by many Internet posts) company, Civil

Enforcement Ltd.

 

The Daily Mail ran an artical last year on the subject - link:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=424553&in_page_id=1770#StartComments

 

My question is: How is it that the DVLA are legally allowed to supply

(in fact sell) my details to unofficial bodies (in fact rouge traders

in this case) without my consent when I should be protected under the

Data Protection Act?

 

I understand that this company has no legal case to pursue the

registered owner of vehicles for alleged offences by the driver and

simply causes stress and anxiety for the owner.

 

You may like to check out this links:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/parking-traffic-offences/97586-civil-enforcement-ltd-again-11.html

And the post by WebFerret for further clarification.

 

Considering the enormous number of people being duped into paying

illegal 'fines' which is aided and abetted by this Government, urgent

action is necessary to stop immediately this abuse of personal data and

the support to these criminal activities.

 

Your view would be very much appreciated.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

You can locate and write to your local MP by visiting:

 

WriteToThem - Email or fax your Councillor, MP, MEP, MSP or Welsh, NI, London Assembly Member for free and entering your postcode.

Link to post
Share on other sites

An update - just found this posted 5th Sept 2007

 

ICO restricts DVLA in handling of personal data

 

link: ICO restricts DVLA in handling of personal data

 

It states:

 

The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) has issued guidance to the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) over what personal information it can release to third-parties.

 

There is concern that the vehicle licensing agency is releasing information too freely, and breaking privacy laws as a result.

The ICO says the DVLA can pass on individuals' personal details if "there is good reason", such as the prevention or detection of crime.

 

The guidance explains to individuals the circumstances where the information might be shared without breaking data protection rules.

The DVLA keeps a register containing details of all vehicles licensed for use on the road and can pass details from the register to a third-party for a number of legitimate reasons.

 

 

Legitimate reasons include to identify vehicles on the road to help prevent and detect crime, to investigate suspected insurance fraud, to improve road safety or to ensure that vehicles are properly taxed.

Although the DVLA does not have to obtain permission before passing an individual's details to other people, the person or organisation requesting the information must prove that they have "reasonable cause" to obtain an individual's details.

 

For example, a company requesting information to enforce parking fees must also provide evidence that a parking charge scheme actually exists and that drivers are made aware that the scheme is in force.

Phil Jones, assistant commissioner at the ICO, said, "The DVLA passes on information from its register to third parties for a variety of legitimate reasons. However, the person or organisation requesting the information must always provide evidence to the DVLA which shows why their request is reasonable."

 

It is an offence under the Data Protection Act to mislead the DVLA as to why information is required. The DVLA has made millions of pounds from selling personal information to third-parties from its database of drivers and vehicles. This practice has now been limited after an outcry, following revelations that criminals had paid for such information.

 

So the heat is on.........

Link to post
Share on other sites

The DVLA have evidently supplied my details to this

(rouge - as confirmed by many Internet posts) company, Civil

Enforcement Ltd.

 

How is it that the DVLA are legally allowed to supply

(in fact sell) my details to unofficial bodies (in fact rouge traders

in this case) without my consent.

 

Nothing wrong with the letter - I would love to know what response you receive.

 

I don't normally bother about spelling, but if it is going to your MP you may want to correct 'rouge' to 'rogue' as they mean two entirely different things!

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest perky88

I think you need to consider the comment "Innocent Motorists" - parking on land you are not supposed to be on and getting a ticket/invoice then ignoring it ... you are hardly innocent.

 

DVLA will release information only if there is good cause, when an application is made to DVLA from a PPC the following needs to be sent for EACH and EVERY request:

 

v888x3

Copy of Signed license agreement between PPC & Site

Copy of Signage on display at site

Copy of ticket conditions that state DVLA request will be made after xdays

Confirmation of time & date ticket was applied

Reason why charge was issued (refer to sign & ticket conditions)

 

If ALL of these are not sent then DVLA will not send RK details.

 

So ... Innocent motorosts, I can not see a vehicle in the street take its reg number/make/model and just write to DVLA asking for info .. as there is not reasonable cause.

 

The reasonable cause for PPC is a sign on display, the notice attached stating that DVLA will be contacted for RK details and the PPC is asking for their details so they can enforce the ticket/invoice attached to vehicle in accordance with the signage/ticket conditions.

 

The online users have a slightly different method of getting the information but again, they need to show reasonable cause and if any motorist feels their information has been accessed incorrectly they have a right to contact DVLA and ask why they released it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you need to consider the comment "Innocent Motorists" - parking on land you are not supposed to be on and getting a ticket/invoice then ignoring it ... you are hardly innocent.

 

DVLA will release information only if there is good cause, when an application is made to DVLA from a PPC the following needs to be sent for EACH and EVERY request:

 

v888x3

Copy of Signed license agreement between PPC & Site

Copy of Signage on display at site

Copy of ticket conditions that state DVLA request will be made after xdays

Confirmation of time & date ticket was applied

Reason why charge was issued (refer to sign & ticket conditions)

 

If ALL of these are not sent then DVLA will not send RK details.

 

So ... Innocent motorosts, I can not see a vehicle in the street take its reg number/make/model and just write to DVLA asking for info .. as there is not reasonable cause.

 

The reasonable cause for PPC is a sign on display, the notice attached stating that DVLA will be contacted for RK details and the PPC is asking for their details so they can enforce the ticket/invoice attached to vehicle in accordance with the signage/ticket conditions.

 

The online users have a slightly different method of getting the information but again, they need to show reasonable cause and if any motorist feels their information has been accessed incorrectly they have a right to contact DVLA and ask why they released it.

 

Here we go again, the ill informed and over-agendised Perky and his misgivings about law, life and what's what...

 

Innocence, as a legal term, is assumed. If you're suggesting that any person on this forum is not innocent then I challenge you to produce evidence that suggests otherwise and present your case to a court. Until then you aren't a District Judge, you're not the man who decides who is and who is not innocent.

 

Indeed were I feeling pedantic I'd encourage anyone you suggest is not innocent to sue you for your libelous remarks. Just who do you think you are?

 

All those documents asked for are proof of absolutely nothing. They bear no more relevance than the size of my socks to the argument at hand. These are all as flexible and malleable as each other and all open to abuse by over zealous parking companies. Ineed, it is in the parking company's interests to manipulate these mechanisms. If the tickets I am told about are anything to go by it is clear the information is being released for less than legitemate purposes. It is clear the DVLA does not understand contract law, nor do they understand the DPA. They, as the parking companies are both chums together, out to make money at the expense of INNOCENT (don't you dare suggest otherwise, young man) motorists.

 

You can, in fact, see a vehicle on the street and send all of those doucments off. Nothing in those documents suggests they have to be true, does it? Again, if many of the tickets I'm dealing with at present represent the standard then I would against suggest that the DVLA are duped into handing over a great many details.

 

The fact is the PPCs don't want the data for a legitemate purpose. They want it to commit criminal offences of harassment in many cases, to commit fraud by misrepresentation, in others and to pursue debts that they are not owed in the vast majority of the remainder of cases. In short, the DVLA sell our details to criminals, debt collectors and people of less than honest standing. The DVLA has no interest in self regulating when it comes to this. It produces too much revenue. Rather I urge you all to complain to your MPs, the Data Commissioner, the OFT and to copy these letters, should you so wish, to the Prime Minister.

 

Selling Data without your consent is a crime. Looks to me like the DVLA are no more than state legitemised information peddlers. Who knows, they might sell your national insurance numbers if the ID card sheme is ever introduced!

 

I urge you all to take anything Perky says on this site with a massive dose of salt. The man is affiliated with parking companies and uses this site to pursue what I suspect to be his working/company agenda. His advice, in my opinion, is bad and furthers his own interests in having you pay these tickets.

 

Please read around this subject from as many sources as you can and learn for yourselves what these people can and cannot do to and because of you.

 

All the best,

 

PJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest perky88

PJ,

Is this post relating to payment of any parking charges .. No.

Am I advising any person to pay a charge .. No

 

I explained what needs to be produced to DVLA to show reasonable cause.

 

Please try and keep to the topic of the thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, you did implicitly accuse anyone who doesn't pay a civil invoice to be 'guilty' of something. 'Innocence' and 'guilt' are terms used for criminal cases, not civil.

 

Also, what does the DVLA define as a 'good cause'? Aiding a company to unlawfully harass and intimidate people into paying an invoice of debatable validity is not, in my very humble opinion, a good cause. If a bank sold address details to all and sundry simply because all and sundry asked for them, the bank would be up before the ICO for non-compliance with the DPA, their data license revoked and the controllers responsible would face gaol time. As the DVLA are not exempt from the Act by any means, does the fact that they are a 'Governmental' agency play any part in their not being hauled before the ICO...? :rolleyes:

-----

Click the scales if I've been useful! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you need to consider the comment "Innocent Motorists" - parking on land you are not supposed to be on and getting a ticket/invoice then ignoring it ... you are hardly innocent.

 

Whether you are affiliated with parking companies or the DVLA, or indeed have a finacial interst in these uncrupulouse goings on, I do not know. But, in my view, what is certain from your comments, is that you do not sit on the same side of the fence with regard to this topic!

 

To suggest that I, need to consider my comment "Innocent Motorists" - ha - is just plain laughable! and not in anyway supportive of the flavour of this forum.

 

Many many people have INNOCENTLY gone about their daily lives to shop, buy a Big Mac, have a coffee ect and parked quite INNOCENTLY on land providing 'free' parking facilities by the vendor - as the vendor would indeed wish, to attract custom.

 

These INNOCENT people have not abused the parking facilities (like some commuters do) they have simply used them in accordance and in relation to the 'shopping' facilities provided at the sites. They have been oblivious to any alleged signage reported to have been displayed, because it is never obvious, if indeed exists at all, and specifically designed that way I suspect to entrap motorists!

 

These INNOCENT motorists have not been ticketed at the time of an alleged offence - so the first thing they know is when the first letter drops through the letterbox of the registered keeper, demanding a disproportionate amount of money to an alleged parking offence that in reality has no legal basis to stand up in court.

 

These rogue (thank you for the spelling Sidewinder) companies, with the apparent blessing of our Government (aka DVLA), then pursue these INNOCENT motorists with nothing more than bully tactics in the hope they are scared into paying.

 

The unfortunate thing is that many INNOCENT people do pay out of fear - and the [problem] has then worked.

 

People come to this site for help and support from these crooks at what is a very stressful time for them; and you, perky88, do nothing to help support and encourage them in my view with your comments here - so thanks for your input, but I like petej2811 response much better!

 

But I'll take it all back if you prove to me that you've supported us and written to you local PM on the subject - lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing wrong with the letter - I would love to know what response you receive.

 

I don't normally bother about spelling, but if it is going to your MP you may want to correct 'rouge' to 'rogue' as they mean two entirely different things!

 

Hi Sidewinder

 

Letter already gone - but I suspect they should guess I used spellcheck and did not pick the correct word up - my mistake and thanks for pointing it out.

 

I will indeed keep you all posted on any responce I receive.

Link to post
Share on other sites

PJ,

Is this post relating to payment of any parking charges .. No.

Am I advising any person to pay a charge .. No

 

I explained what needs to be produced to DVLA to show reasonable cause.

 

Please try and keep to the topic of the thread.

 

YTou'll note that this very much keeps to the topic of the thread. Do you parking people not read or understand anything presented to you in written form?

 

PJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

Data Protection is not really a Parking or Traffic topic anyway this should be in the DVLA forum?

Apart from that fact that the OP was about the release of personal data by the DVLA to facilitate private parking ticket enforcement.

 

How does the release of the RK's data by the DVLA assist the PPCs in the enforcement of their charges against the driver?

 

I suspect that this is a point that the Information Commissioner has not really thought through.

 

I feel some template letters of complaint to the DVLA and to the Information Commissioner coming on . . .

********************************************

Nothing in this post constitutes "advice" which I may not, in any event, be qualified to provide.

The only interpretation permitted on this post (or any others I may have made) is that this is what I would personally consider doing in the circumstances discussed. Each and every reader of this post or any other I may have made must take responsibility for forming their own view and making their own decision.

I receive an unwieldy number of private messages. I am happy to respond to messages posted on open forum but am unable to respond to private messages, seeking advice, when the substance of that message should properly be on the open forum.

Many thanks for your assistance and understanding on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Data Protection is not really a Parking or Traffic topic anyway this should be in the DVLA forum?

 

Of course it is.

 

Praking companies request details from the DVLA in contravention of the Data Protection Act. Ergo, ipso facto, QED the DPA and the DVLA are linked and to do with parking companies.

 

If we listenned to you we'd put threads to do with parking under cars... Cars, clearly and plainly have nothing to do with parking, do they?

 

I swear your posts become less and less sensible as time goes on. Do I really need to explain this to you?

 

I said it once and I'll say it again, I read some of your posts and feel like a teacher explaining things to the thick class.

 

PJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

Data Protection is not really a Parking or Traffic topic anyway this should be in the DVLA forum?

 

Well, your user ID just sums it all up for me - "GREEN & mean" !!!!!

 

Why don't you check out my post under Civil Enforcement Ltd - What a [problem]! :

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/parking-traffic-offences/97586-civil-enforcement-ltd-again-11.html

 

and you will see (hopefully) my point, that if the DVLA is prevented from giving out (nay, selling!) private and confidetial information that should be protected under the Data Protection Act, then this situation, allowing "crooks to rob people blind", could simply not take place - end of story.

 

So write to your PM and complain and quit 'nit picking' these threads!

 

Only constructive comment welcome - thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel some template letters of complaint to the DVLA and to the Information Commissioner coming on . . .

 

Thanks Bernie

 

Template letters of complaint is a great idea.

 

Looking forward to them.

 

Thanks for your help and support.

Link to post
Share on other sites

'Cos of that little thing our grandparents to the nth degree died for - freedom of speech. Don't start on a censoring rampage, because up until this point I'm firmly on your side. The minute you start suggesting that people like perky shouldn't be allowed to post, you've lost my vote and will never get it back.

-----

Click the scales if I've been useful! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are bosses of private parking companies being freely allowed to give advice on this forum?

 

Because they like anyone else are entitled to an opinion. Perky has never pretended he is anything other than an interested party giving an alternative view to the parking debate. I work for a Local Authority (although not in parking) does that mean I hould be 'banned' to for having a vested interest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no problem with perky being allowed to post but he should identify himself and make clear his interest and natural bias. It is clear that several posters including the most recent one had no idea he was the boss of a private parking company. But I do admit that I am a bit taken aback that there are so many on here who are in favour of private parking tickets, in what is supposed to be a consumer rights froum. I'm all in favour of free speech but to use an analogy I would not choose a EDIT to advise me on the law, and I would be a bit outraged had he done so without my knowledge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...