Jump to content


Registered Keeper responsibility to PPC's


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4807 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

Also no mention of "Disabled" & "Mother child bays". How can they fine you for parking in one of these bays? No supermarket has signs up insisting that you msut display your blue badge as they have no legal right to do so and still will not according to these proposed regulations.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 83
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Also no mention of "Disabled" & "Mother child bays". How can they fine you for parking in one of these bays? No supermarket has signs up insisting that you msut display your blue badge as they have no legal right to do so and still will not according to these proposed regulations.

 

You seem to be under the illusion these are public car parks, they are not they are private land and the owner can request what they like including having a blue badge. You should not confuse an offence under a statute with a contractual obligation or request. My local night club does not allow entry without a passport or driving licence and this a requirement of entry despite them not being associated with UK immigration or the DVLA and they are perfectly entitled to do so. It would not be a fine if they then insisted that it was free entry if you had ID but £50 without that would be the terms of admission. Parking in a supermarket disabled bay could in my view be free to anyone displaying a valid blue bade and £75 to anyone without, why would this be unlawful? As long a charge does not break any laws of discrimitation such as racial or sexual then a landowner should be free to charge what he or she likes. If you are fed up with people going to a weekly soccer matching parking outside your flats why should you not errect signs charging non residents £75 to park, they have an option to choose not to park and most would choose not to as its very expensive in theory keeping parking free. The supermarkets would have to clarify their legal position as regards their terms and conditions such as specifying what a 'parent and child' bay may be used for but if they do so charging 'non parents' to park in a parent and chil bay is perfectly reasonable in my view.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Does anyone know what legislation allows the DVLA to pass on private details to a private company? Does this legislation overule the ECHR privacy laws, the Human Rights Act, etc? Otherwise are they just passing on these details without regard to the above?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone know what legislation allows the DVLA to pass on private details to a private company? Does this legislation overule the ECHR privacy laws, the Human Rights Act, etc? Otherwise are they just passing on these details without regard to the above?

 

When you sign your car documents you give the DVLA permission to pass on these details to anyone who can show they need them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone know what legislation allows the DVLA to pass on private details to a private company? Does this legislation overule the ECHR privacy laws, the Human Rights Act, etc? Otherwise are they just passing on these details without regard to the above?

 

The relevant law is regulation 27 of the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 2002.

 

What specific parts of the ECHR do you think are breached?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right to privacy for a start. And unless they can show "reasonable cause in a democratic society regulated by law" then this would be in breach of the ECHR.

But it does seem that Reg 27 gives them this right - not to say that Reg 27 itself does not violate the ECHR as I don't think it is reasonable or required

without any additional safeguards, appeal process, or the DVLA passing this information on to PPC without checking EACH and EVERY request

to make sure that it meets the "just cause" requirement on Regulation 27 - as they obviously don't check that each request meets the requirement

of "just cause" - last year there were over 800000 requests by PPCs - they did not check each and every request and IMO they are operating outside

the requirements of Reg 27.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...