Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • By the way, the reason that you wouldn't proceed against Paclink is because they are out of the jurisdiction – in Spain
    • Good point, BN.   Changing the subject a bit, Directors of Public Health have written to the goverment expressing serious concerns about the easing of lockdown.   https://www.adph.org.uk/2020/05/adph-presidential-blog-a-time-for-steady-leadership-careful-preparation-and-measured-steps/
    • Thank you – and I understand that you didn't take out any compensation cover. You should read around some of the Hermes threads on this forum. I have always taken the view that once you pay for the delivery costs, then you are entitled to have the item delivered safely and if not then the delivery company is in breach – and in fact the delivery broker – Paclink is also in breach. I think it should be unnecessary for you to insure yourself against the breach of their service provider. It is the service provider who should insure themselves against any incidents of loss parcels. The Joe Lycett's got your back programme on Hermes was extremely useful. I notice that there are a couple of instances of it on YouTube. Of course they are in breach of copyright and it wouldn't at all surprise me if they are taken down at some point. I suggest that you make fairly urgent arrangements to get a copy of this program onto your computer because you may need it. It would not be a breach of copyright to produce it before a court – although the judge may already have seen it or have heard it. Have you actually began a claim against Hermes? I think you should begin their claims process immediately – but I certainly think that you should download a copy of the programme immediately as well. Of course Hermes will try to say that you are not their customer and that  their client is Paclink. Of course that is true. On that basis Hermes will try to say that they are out of your reach in terms of bringing a legal action because you are not party to their contract with Paclink. However, Under the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act, where the contract is clearly intended to address you as a beneficiary and where your interests are not specifically excluded by the contract, then you inherit all of the rights of the contracting parties – as if you were a party to the contract. So I suggest that you begin the claims process against Hermes, download the programme so that you have got that safely stored away in your armoury and then come back here with the results of your Hermes complaint. I can predict fairly confidently now that you will have to threaten a legal action – and probably you will have to issue the papers. There is then a chance that Hermes may put their hands up – but on the other hand they may decide to test your resolve by forcing you onto the next step where you have to pay hearing fee. If you do that then they will start to take you more seriously and then they may put their hands up – but they may decide to go all the way and see you in court. Because you are a litigant in person – even though you would be the claimant, the case would be transferred to your local court. That would produce logistical problems for Hermes who would have to instruct a local legal representative and they would incur costs there. These costs will not be recoverable under the small claims rules because your claim would be for less than £10,000. If you won the case then you would get your money, plus interest – presently at 8% (a nice earner) plus your costs. Your risk factors are that if you lost, then you would come away empty-handed but also you will be out of pocket to the tune of your fees and you would probably have to pay for the reasonable costs of travel for the Hermes legal representative – but that would be it. On the basis of what you have told us, I consider that your eventual chances of success at about 85%. Hermes risk factors include having to pay you back the value of your item, having to refund you your court costs and your reasonable costs of travel – but more significantly for Hermes, a defeat in court where they try to rely on the fact that you hadn't bought a compensation package would send a good message across an industry which seems to have produced a culture going back there are 30 or 40 years where customers who pay their money now believe that they must also pay to insure against the negligence of their own service providers – two home have they have already paid the contractual price of performance. How this ever happened is a mystery to me.  
    • The concerns go beyond the ORG worries, the companies and people involved Serco, G4S, and Dido Harding don't inspire confidence in their ability to prevent data leaks to begin with. Be so easy to add a "Refused vaccination" flag, or refused ID Chip for unrestricted access to services.  in there.
    • Oh, I checked again the details are as follows: I declared £522 as the value. I attach the Paclink shipment note and it looks like a 3 day delivery rather than next day.  Paclink delivery Hermes shower.pdf
  • Our picks

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 540 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Just spotted this on the Pranksters website.

 

Sunday, 29 April 2018

UKPC banned by the DVLA

UK Parking Control Ltd have been banned from accessing the DVLA database. This means for instance that if they issue a windscreen ticket, they have no way of following up and contacting the keeper (unless the keeper appeals giving away their address). This also means that any ANPR site they manage is now effectively useless because tickets cannot be issued at all. Essentially then, their income stream dries up, and any landowners using them have no effective parking management.

 

This is therefore not a step undertaken lightly by the DVLA. Although the DVLA are not divulging the exact details, they are investigating UKPC for a potential breach of contract. The DVLA will not be releasing details until the investigation is finished. UKPC will be hoping that the investigation is swifter than the investigation into MIL Collections, which has so far taken several years and is still continuing. Perhaps the investigation will be as quick as the one into Proserve, which only took a year or so.

 

http://tinyurl.com/jvzl7dp

 

Hopefully this will take ages for the DVLA to investigate and ensuring that UKPC go broke


If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear, this is terribly sad news. What a dreadful thing to happen to this wonderful company and I feel so sorry for all the landowners which they are apparently acting for.

 

I think we should have a whip round for them because clearly they need some help.

 

Please make your donations to us – The Consumer Action Group and we will be sure we will pass them on !!:lol::lol::lol::madgrin::madgrin::madgrin: (not)


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I saw that but I don't think that is recent. I am unable to create a PDF file so can I reply to your word do through this way,is that ok

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

You are welcome to post anything you wish regarding UKPC but remember that you don't use slanderous or defamatory comments


If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear....

What a pity...

Never mind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About time, now let's see what GDPR does to the parking cowboys, and the DVLA.


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome news!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow! One wonders what on earth they have done this time to finally warrant an investigation by that laughingly "robust and diligent "enterprise known as the DVLA or as they are otherwise known-

"The Incompetents". These parking companies are regularly mentioned in the newspapers, our forum and the Parking Prankster along with countless other forums not to mention the AA, the RAC and Citizens Advice as being greedy , corrupt , crooks etc ,etc and the DVLA goes on blithely sending out our details to them without apparently a second thought.

What on earth has stung this useless and incompetent bunch to actually ban UKPC pro tem -have they actually woken up to the fact that they are not dealing with upright honest companies after all.

The Augean stables emitted much less of a smell than these corrupt, stinking merchants that are a disgrace to our Country.

Perhaps the recent criticism by certain MPS of the DVLA in relation to the venality and criminality of some private parking companies has at long last percolated into that complacent lot in Swansea and they have finally decided that they no longer want to be the laughing stock that they have become. Rumour even has it that Disney is now replacing their Mickey Mouse watches with DVLA watches so low has their reputation sunk.

One can only hope that Parking Eye will be next in the firing line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There has been a couple of news stories in the papers

 

http://tinyurl.com/yatql8v6

 

http://tinyurl.com/ybk7dwqm

 

From what I can gather from the stories are that when UKPC were previously suspended, they carried on ticketing cars and when the ban was over, they went after the keepers which they shouldn't have done. I would imagine that they kept the data from their ANPR operations and subsequently went after the keepers again. If this is proved then I don't think they should keep their membership of the BPA (but then, I am biased). I can imagine the ICO having an interest in this too


If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can imagine the ICO having an interest in this too

 

Think you would be mistaken. The ICO think their remit is to assist companies on how to do the minimal to get by and flout the data protection laws. They have no real interest in actually enforcing data protection correctly to the benefit of the public. For instance, a data subject needs to be aware and notified that their personal data will be processed. In the case of ANPR the registered keeper may not even be in the vehicle so will not be aware of the processing of their personal data by a PPC. Yet it does get processed by the DVLA automatically passing it on with no notification to the RK allowing them the time to object to the DVLA passing it on, and by the PPC then further processing the RK data in mos instances with no lawful reason. The GDPR is going to be a big thorn in the side. I am waiting for the ICO to respond to FOI as to how this will all be lawful under the GDPR. Bet they will fudge it to the benefit of the DVLA and the PPCs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

any person getting a NTK from then should ask the DVLA who applied to obtain their keeper details as in the past other companies have ontained the details and then passed them on. This is also unlawful.

 

If you have got say 3 screen tickets they shoudl apply for your detaIls 3 times and not rely on the assumption that the person is still the keeper. again, checking with the DVLA abotu who and when will halp kill off this awful mob, the reason the parking co's have done so well is not their business brilliance but joe public's ignorance so spread the word

Edited by honeybee13
Paras

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have received £100 ticket yesterday at my local Tesco. What do I do with it?:jaw:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to start a new thread in the private parking forum please, then we can advise.

 

HB


Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...