The DVLA will obfuscate and dither because they make millions out of this racket and the estimate of lawfully issued NTK's is actually very small. Their quality control is laughable ( they ask PE to tell them about a single parking eevnt of PE's choosing), however, that shouldt stop you from making a comaplint to both the DVLA and when you get their rubbish response to the ICO.
Whej parliament is fed up choking on brexit they might get round to looking at such matters again and possibly force the DVLA to enforce protocols that make the parking bandits obey the law.
thank you, i will do nothing at this point.
with regards to the wrong title, i didnt actually type that line in my post (think admin joined 2 posts together and somehow included that quote)
they just assumed i was a Ms because of my name, i havent changed gender
Thanks for the reply.
Strange thing is my previous Bank does not show up as a hard search it is listed as anti money laundering and appears in the section marked as ‘will not harm your credit score’. Maybe the free credit check websites are not 100% accurate.
the other uncomfortable truth is that the DCA's dont have a consumer credit licence so if he pays them and the parking co send him a new invpice the debt hasnt been legally settled and he will have to pay again.
This is the calibre of people you are dealing with
This is why they are the parking world's second best (or worst) solicitors, they conveniently forget to tell you that no liabilty whatsoever is created unless the company puts their proper business address on the signage and NTK.
A PO Box No is an immediate fail as is attempting to use a false instrument to make a pecuniary advantage as these muppets appear to be doing by using the wrong image of the terms offered. they also mention VAT in their charge when it isnt applicable if the charge is actually valid and not a penalty.
Also there is no trade body called the Independent Parking Committee and Will and John at the IPC will huff and puff at anyone who claims membeship of such an organisation.
That also menas that PPS cant legally access your keeper details.
The name changed in 2016 so PPS should have changed their signs.
It is my opinion that you havent been offered a contract and no liabilty has been cheated by anyone, let alone the keeper.
Problem is that some judges ignore the small print and say " well, there was a sign so it must be right" when it isnt so.
Same goes with Planning consent but get enough small things and it creates it own momentum and tips the scales in your favour.
Something for the future, no point telling them this yet, let them waste their clients money writing to you again.
Now use of salutatio
n- if you have identified as female when born male you can make a lot of mileage out of this otherwise it is just another example of their slapdash work and stupidity