Jump to content


The DVLA. Are they out of order??


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3108 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

Does anyone else think it's only a matter of time before DVLA are taken to court for providing personal details to PCN Companies (when so many have been found to operate outside of agreed guidlines) for what amounts to nothing more than a civil matter and not a criminal offence?

 

It happened to the banks so if it is proven to have been wrong, the DVLA had better watch out for all the back claims (and the DVLA will have records of those individuals whos details they have supplied to such companies...won't they?)

 

:???:

Link to post
Share on other sites

you would think so.. I don't know if you can do a Subject Access Request to the DVLA for your own data ?

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Reasonable cause" is the key anybody with reasonable cause can require the DVLA to furnish them with a keepers details. Where it falls over is in a PPC's case being a member of an accredited ATA is enough reasonable cause. Its bad enough when they do a paper request because they simply say the cause is the issue of a charge. If they have access to the electronic link, they just receive the details! The only record the DVLA have of the request is that it was made, not for the reason it was made!

 

When keeper liability first came in the DVLA suspended 5 companies from receiving details for 3 months for issuing false claims on their signs and or paperwork. Since that time they seem to be able to get away with anything.

 

Complain to the DVLA they contact the BPA who then say they are not a regulator, yet have a sanctions system which is very secretive about it.

 

It really does need looking at because as you say certain companies are really overstepping the mark when it comes to these charges.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, to me, it looks like there's scope for investigation to unearth issues that could to people being able to reclaim any money they may have paid, if not from the PPC from the DVLA.

 

This could be embarrasing and costly for the governement and also lead to other investigations into Personal Data Protection.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is interesting, esme.. :)

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

"It is an offence under Section 55 of the Data Protection Act to obtain information under false pretence or to use it for a purpose other than that originally stated."

While i'm no legal expert, this does seem thin ice. If PCC's are sending threatening letters and demands for money, surely this is against the principle on which the data was realeased?

Link to post
Share on other sites

"It is an offence under Section 55 of the Data Protection Act to obtain information under false pretence or to use it for a purpose other than that originally stated."

While i'm no legal expert, this does seem thin ice. If PCC's are sending threatening letters and demands for money, surely this is against the principle on which the data was realeased?

 

Not really they are perfectly entitled to send a "demand" or request for payment for something you owe them. As long as they follow the correct format for requesting payment. The whole problem is the amounts they claim, and the way they go about trying to collect it. I dont think many people would complain if NCP sent a NTK for any due amount ie: the cost of parking which was not paid, £2.50 DVLA fee and say £5 admin, its the £60/70/100 for whatever they have dreamed up they want paying for.

 

I remember the good old days NCP car park you drove in took a ticket, on the way out handed ticket to person in kiosk and they charged you whatever was due. Now stay 10 mins over the paid time and they deem it reasonable to charge you £60/70

Link to post
Share on other sites

I completely agree with the concept of paying to park and that the excessive charges are THE problem we want to get rid of. BUT, my point was that when proven to use the data and then NOT to follow guidelines (coersion, extortionate charges etc etc), thats when the DVLA have failed to protect our data and should be culpupal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I completely agree with the concept of paying to park and that the excessive charges are THE problem we want to get rid of. BUT, my point was that when proven to use the data and then NOT to follow guidelines (coersion, extortionate charges etc etc), thats when the DVLA have failed to protect our data and should be culpupal.

 

 

I wonder if the applicants for this data have the right to pass it on to third parties in their attempts to recover their extortionate charges.

PUTTING IT IN WRITING & KEEPING COPIES IS A MUST FOR SUCCESS

Link to post
Share on other sites

nice one dw 190, great point. I think we're getting there now

 

 

Quite a lot of advice goes out to send complaints to the dvla about many things.

 

 

I think anyone who has received a letter from a DCA should complain to the DVLA that the information provided by the Agency has been passed to a t/party without the consent of the Data Subject.

PUTTING IT IN WRITING & KEEPING COPIES IS A MUST FOR SUCCESS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Where reasonable cause has been demonstrated, information is disclosed on the condition that it will only be used for the requested purpose and that the recipient will protect its confidentiality. It is an offence under Section 55 of the Data Protection Act to obtain information under false pretence or to use it for a purpose other than that originally stated.

 

I wonder if the applicants disclose that they may pass the information on to DCA's

 

 

I have not had the opportunity to make a Subject Access Request to the DVLA but anyone who's data has been passed on to a DCA could make a SAR and see what reasons the applicant has given.

 

 

 

 

PUTTING IT IN WRITING & KEEPING COPIES IS A MUST FOR SUCCESS

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Reasonable cause" is the key anybody with reasonable cause can require the DVLA to furnish them with a keepers details. Where it falls over is in a PPC's case being a member of an accredited ATA is enough reasonable cause. Its bad enough when they do a paper request because they simply say the cause is the issue of a charge. If they have access to the electronic link, they just receive the details! The only record the DVLA have of the request is that it was made, not for the reason it was made!

 

When keeper liability first came in the DVLA suspended 5 companies from receiving details for 3 months for issuing false claims on their signs and or paperwork. Since that time they seem to be able to get away with anything.

 

Complain to the DVLA they contact the BPA who then say they are not a regulator, yet have a sanctions system which is very secretive about it.

 

It really does need looking at because as you say certain companies are really overstepping the mark when it comes to these charges.

 

I agree that this whole issue needs to be looked at in much greater detail, however I was recently made aware of a case in Scotland relating to the lack of ENTRY signage at a Lidl's Supermarket . A number of Parking Charges were issued in the absence of signage and a subsequent compliant was raised through the BPA by the local CAB. Not surprisingly this complaint was rejected on the basis that the BPA do not insist on entry signage in all cases.

 

A further compliant was then raised through the DVLA on the reasonable cause issue, as a consequence the DVLA investigated the matter further and found in favour of the complainer. The outcome was that all charges had to be refunded or cancelled during the period that entry signage was missing and as I understand it the BPA received a slap for failing to investigate the matter properly (Nothing new there then)

 

However to date the company in question have not notified the recipients of cancelation and thefore a further complaint may be required. Nevertheless ther appears to be a glimmer of hope that things are moving in the right direction.

Edited by Crocdoc
Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding that case in Scotland. Those people who made the payments for those charges need to be refunded. Either through the PCC repaying them (not likely without pressure from those who made the judgement) or by directly chasing up for a refund (IF THEY ARE AWARE THEY ARE DUE ONE).

 

Crocdoc. Any chance you could provide the name of the area so that we can get this info out to those who have paid?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...