War Is Declared: Court Action Against DVLA

[Michael Browne]

War Is Declared: Court Action Against DVLA

 

As many of the regulars on here will be aware, some of us, including Nev Metson (ex- Fraud Squad detective), Martin Cutts (Plain Language Commission), Paul Morris (Data Protection Society) and myself (cantankerous old git), have been beavering away to undermine the whole house of cards that is the BPA AOS scheme and its far-too-cosy relationship with the DVLA.

 

Today I can announce the next step in that process. I have sent a Letter Before Action for a proposed county court claim against the Secretary of State for Transport.

 

The basis of the action is that, as PPCs have no lawful means of enforcing their charges (and, in many instances, cannot lawfully offer parking facilities), there no longer exists any "reasonable cause" for the DVLA to release registered keeper details to these companies. By releasing the data, the DVLA are in breach of a number of sections of the Data Protection Act.

 

The LBA can be read here (personal details scrubbed): https://www.dropbox.com/s/nxv9h9876grs0ze/Dft_LBA2.pdf

 

 

See here:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=4069601

[url=https://www.dropbox.com/s/nxv9h9876grs0ze/Dft_LBA2.pdf][/url]

Edited July 13, 2012 by Michael Browne

[sailor sam]

Excellent... some may say ambitious because we all know that the government will close ranks and find any legal loop hole there is, no matter how small. I for one though sincerely wish you luck and no doubt you will keep us informed.

[Jamberson]

Don't want to come across as trying to undermine your good work, but isn't there an argument that even if the charges are not enforceable, they still have what they would call a reasonable cause to ask for the data - in that the charges act as a deterrent to people parking willy-nilly on private ground or disregarding car park conditions. Wouldn't that be a strong line of argument for them?

[afcwben]

This thread on CAG certainly brings into focus the ways PPC's behave http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?357625-Private-Parking-Report-exposes-their-dubious-practices(2-Viewing)-nbsp

[Crocdoc]

Don't want to come across as trying to undermine your good work, but isn't there an argument that even if the charges are not enforceable, they still have what they would call a reasonable cause to ask for the data - in that the charges act as a deterrent to people parking willy-nilly on private ground or disregarding car park conditions. Wouldn't that be a strong line of argument for them?

 

In response, There is no doubt that landowners have the right to protect their own property, this question in my view surrounds the very questionable methods currently used. Barrier entry and eagress has been used in major transport hubs for years, should this method be extended into shopping centres etc it may well generate greater income for the proprietor and at the same time provide the public with protection from companies who try every trick to generate income through lack of knowledge. The other question is of course if a stance is not made against private limited companies who quite clearly impose penalties, where will this end? In recent weeks we have already seen Retail Loss Prevention throw their toys out the pram for being qustioned about their questionable practices. If these companies are given an inch they will take a mile.

 

In conclusion, in the last few days there has been a number of interesting developments and publications relating to this highly controversial issue, all of which has been now forwarded to members of the Scottish Parliament as I am in no doudt that the BPA will turn up at Holyrood in the near future trying to justify their spurious money making schemes.

Edited July 13, 2012 by Crocdoc

[Michael Browne]

Don't want to come across as trying to undermine your good work, but isn't there an argument that even if the charges are not enforceable, they still have what they would call a reasonable cause to ask for the data - in that the charges act as a deterrent to people parking willy-nilly on private ground or disregarding car park conditions. Wouldn't that be a strong line of argument for them?

The trouble is that membership of the BPA Approved Operator Scheme and compliance with the Code of Practice equals, ‘reasonable cause’ as decided by DVLA. These requests are submitted and data released electronically. It is completely automated with no oversight whatsoever.

The DVLA has surrendered both the decision making process and the control of the release of registered keeper data to the BPA and the private parking companies themselves.

[Jamberson]

The DVLA has surrendered both the decision making process and the control of the release of registered keeper data to the BPA and the private parking companies themselves.

 

That's a fair point - but I don't get why the basis of your action is the lack of enforceability.

[raydetinu]

Is your case affected by the Protection of Freedoms Act which came into force in May? which I believe gives goverment departments some excemption from the data protection act???

Also are Capita involved in this as well? or do they not deal with this part?

[Michael Browne]

That's a fair point - but I don't get why the basis of your action is the lack of enforceability.

 

It's not my action. It's by a user on MSE. I merely copied his post to CAG

 

See here:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=4069601

[Leagle Egal]

Rather than repeat myself and bore you all to death, can I simply refer you to my written considerations in the comments about bailiffs, since these reflect on this thread also, particularly the legalities and enforcement procedures being employed.

[DBC]

Rather than repeat myself and bore you all to death, can I simply refer you to my written considerations in the comments about bailiffs, since these reflect on this thread also, particularly the legalities and enforcement procedures being employed.

 

Except that real bailiffs don't come into the PPC equation. Private parking companies only use debt collectors who are powerless to enforce a "debt". The only way a PPC can do this is for the case to go to court, the motorist loses and then fails to pay whatever the judge orders within 28 days. Then a CCJ is issued and a bailiff would get involved.