PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

PCN issued by Britannia Parking, Plymouth
Rule1949
post Tue, 8 Jan 2019 - 12:44
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29
Joined: 7 Jan 2019
Member No.: 101,754



Hi

I really do hope that I will find some help with my problem on this site.

In April 2017 I received a letter from Britannia Parking concerning “failure to make a valid payment” at one of the car parks they operate in the south west

I immediately wrote to them , heading my letter “ for information only” confirming that I had visited that site ( I didn’t say who was with me or who was driving the vehicle concerned ); on the stated day; I advised them of the approximate time of arrival and departure and finally provided them with a copy of the debit card transaction showing that 6 hours of parking had been purchased (more than I had parked for). I was even able to tell them which machine had been used for the transaction. I finished my letter with the following “… please advise me of what went wrong. Once I have all the information, I will decide whether or no to appeal your notice.”

The response from Britannia Parking started with “Thank you for your appeal received on xx April 2017”

The letter then went on to give the cause for PCN – First two letters of registration number were entered incorrectly (they were the first two letters from my wife’s car reg). They did offer a much reduced amount if paid within 14 days.

They then confirmed that I had reached the end of their internal appeals procedure and they provided me with a POPLA reference number. I did not appeal to POPLA AS I had not, as far as I was concerned, appealed to Britannia

I have had various letters from DRP and Zenith for various amounts from £100 to £145 and most recently a LETTER OF CLAIM from bwlegal for £145 ( £85 + additional costs of £60) advising that they have been instructed by Britannia to commence legal action if payment is made by 1st February. I did email bwlegal suggesting that they ask their client why in 2017 Britannia declined my appeal BEFORE it was made. I’m not expecting a reply.


Any advice would be most welcome.






This post has been edited by Rule1949: Sun, 13 Jan 2019 - 11:14
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
3 Pages V   1 2 3 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Tue, 8 Jan 2019 - 12:44
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Tue, 8 Jan 2019 - 13:05
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,081
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Your "trick" was never going to work
You missed a chance to kill this at POPLA

Your response to the LBC is insufficient, and you need to formulate a real response, firstly denying the debt, stating that Britannia have proof payment was made, and any error in thier machines recording ot eh VRM - whether a trivial mistake by the user or otherwise - was entirely within their power to rectify. As payment was fully made, to suggest any error recorded by their machine is worthy of £160 is false, clearly a penalty and Beavis supports that this penalty cannot be enforced.
As their clients claim has no chance of success, as the ruling at the Court of Appeal has stated as such, and the Supreme Court did not overturn this ruling in the Beavis case, they should cease the harassment.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Tue, 8 Jan 2019 - 13:30
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11,453
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



So you've missed the point that the NTK is not compliant with the requirements of POFA to be able to hold the keeper liable. Have you told them who was driving. Have you mentioned this to BWL?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Morrowitz
post Tue, 8 Jan 2019 - 18:16
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 24
Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Member No.: 93,101



QUOTE (ostell @ Tue, 8 Jan 2019 - 13:30) *
So you've missed the point that the NTK is not compliant with the requirements of POFA to be able to hold the keeper liable. Have you told them who was driving. Have you mentioned this to BWL?


Hi ostell. Which part of the NTK is not compliant?

Edit:
Is it Section 9(2)(f) of the regs which states
The notice must
(f)warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given—
(i)the amount of the unpaid parking charges specified under paragraph (d) has not been paid in full, and
(ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver,
the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid;


The notice does not at any point say that you (as the keeper) can be made liable for the unpaid amount.

This post has been edited by Morrowitz: Tue, 8 Jan 2019 - 19:22
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cabbyman
post Tue, 8 Jan 2019 - 19:53
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,799
Joined: 15 Dec 2007
From: South of John O'Groats, north of Cape Town.
Member No.: 16,066



You need to go through PoFA sched 4 and tick off all those points that are not complied with. The wording must be precise.

You need to include all the points that Nosferatu mentioned.

Draft your response and post it here for checking and fine-tuning.

It's a shame because the right approach would have killed this at POPLA, possibly before POPLA!

Highly unlikely that BWL will clarify your 'non-appeal.' That's what happens when you try to work to 1949 rules.

This post has been edited by cabbyman: Tue, 8 Jan 2019 - 19:58


--------------------
Cabbyman 10 PPCs 0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Rule1949
post Sun, 13 Jan 2019 - 21:55
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29
Joined: 7 Jan 2019
Member No.: 101,754



Well it’s been an interesting week.
Firstly thank you for the responses.

On Wednesday 9th January I inadvertently picked up a phone call from bwlegal. Perhaps I should have put the phone down immediately, but I didn’t.

The caller did go through some ID questions before continuing ( unlike the bwlegal person who called at 8.40 am on Christmas Eve. They asked no ID questions. That was a very short call!

During the ID questions I was able get my mobile into record mode and with the home phone on speaker the rest of the conversation was recorded.

I asked the reason for the call as their 28 December letter gave me until January 31st to either make a payment or make a response as, in the absence of either of these actions, bwlegal had been instructed to commence legal action by way of a claim in the County Court.

The caller seemed a little unsure whether this matter was about not making a payment or not making a valid payment. The caller ended up by telling me I hadn’t made a payment.

I then asked whether the action was being taken against me as the driver or registered keeper. On 3 occasions the caller said as registered keeper.

In their letter dated 12th December I was advised that it (my account balance) had been sent to bwlegal, to whom all future contact and correspondence should be referred.

The caller then went on to say that Britannia had requested them to chase me concerning the outstanding amount. If the whole matter had been transferred to bwlegaI why were they acting at the request of Britannia? I questioned again why they were chasing me as their 28 December letter clearly gave me until 1st February. The caller then went on to say that although I did have that time, during which I could / should seek independent FREE legal advice, in the meantime they would continue to contact me, as and when, by phone, letter or email, and on each occasion further costs would accrue. That’s when I got close to letting rip ( I didn’t). I advised the caller that I was recording the conversation – the caller told me that they were doing likewise. I then advised them that I did not need / want any contact from them and if they did contact me I would consider it harassment. It was clear that the caller understood this.

Following that call I received further emails from bwlegal on 10th & 11th January !!!!!!

Just as an aside. If you look at the printer reference on the Britannia and bwlegal letters of 12th December they were both printed on the same BWL printer!


For my next step I will be writing a better response to BWLegal as per the advice of nosferatu1001 and cabbyman. I’ll post here as soon as it’s drafted.

Should I mention the harassment in the letter?

Do I need to send a SAR to Britannia?

Finally, If I want to get a reply from bwlegal I have to include the following info :
• Our Reference "Txxxxxx"
• your Full Name; and
• date of birth; and
• address including postcode
• contact number; and
• how we can help
The only thing I have a question over is why DOB ??

These are the letters I have received from BWLegal





Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 13:35
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,081
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



You dont need th eDOB. THey have no need for this information.

Yes send a SAR to Britannia
ensure it ONLY asks for data on you; signs, contracts etc are NOT covered by A SAR and must NOT be asked for.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Rule1949
post Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 14:53
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29
Joined: 7 Jan 2019
Member No.: 101,754



Thanks Noseferatu1001..

Just another thought. As this Business has now been ( allegedly ) transferred to Bwlegal should I also send them a SAR ??
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cabbyman
post Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 15:06
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,799
Joined: 15 Dec 2007
From: South of John O'Groats, north of Cape Town.
Member No.: 16,066



You merely have to write in the standard, accepted format that you would use in any business letter:

Name, address, reference.

Block their number. Next time they phone, as soon as it becomes apparent who it is, put the phone down. They are professional scammers. There is no way your clever tricks are going to win over the phone whereas they may have gleaned a lot of useful information and statements that you inadvertently let slip.

Stick to doing EVERYTHING in writing.


--------------------
Cabbyman 10 PPCs 0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Mon, 14 Jan 2019 - 17:49
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,081
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



No, you send the sar to Britannia as told
They're the original data controller
You don't know if they've already sent everything over. In fact I'm pretty certain they haven't done.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Rule1949
post Thu, 17 Jan 2019 - 12:15
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29
Joined: 7 Jan 2019
Member No.: 101,754



Oh how I wish we hadn’t gone to Plymouth !!
To update I will be making more than one post so as to keep things separate for guidance / advice.

1. SAR sent to Britannia. Their robotic reply was

Dear Sir/Madam,
We have received your Subject Access Request, under ICO guidelines we have one calendar month to respond.
Please be aware we will send a copy of all personal data we hold only. If you have made a request for any additional information which does not qualify as personal data, please see below.
YOU’RE REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
• Landowner agreement - You are not entitled to business sensitive information, it will only be supplied at court, as evidence and not before.
• Contract with the driver - The contract is on the signage in the car park. A copy of the signage will be provided as evidence at court.
• Machine reports - You are not entitled to transactions which do not relate to you, you will be provided with your transaction only. We are under no obligation to provide you with anything further.
• Picture packs - A copy of the signage will be provided as evidence at court.

Your SAR request is free, however please be aware we are able to charge for additional copies and any requests for information which does not qualify as personal data. ICO guidelines advise we are able to charge a reasonable administration fee, which is £10.
Please send a cheque payable to Britannia Parking to the following address: Data Protection Officer, County Gates House, 7th Floor, 300 Poole Road, Poole, BH12 1AZ.
Include a list of the additional information you require and the PCN number/s. Once the cheque has cleared we will action your request. We will only send additional information which is not business sensitive.
Please refer to the ICO website for further information: https://ico.org.uk/your-data-matters/your-right-of-access/
If you do not wish to pay £10, we are under no obligation to provide you with the information, your only options is to wait until this matter progresses to court, when it will be adduced as evidence.
Once you are in receipt of your SAR, all additional correspondence regarding the request for additional information will not be responded to, unless payment of £10 is received.


Am I right in assuming that the additional items referred to in their response referring to “evidence in court” would have to be given to me as part of a pre trial pack ??( If it gets as far as that !!)

I need to advise Bwlegal about the SAR

I propose to make it short and sweet :

To Bwlegal

I acknowledge receipt of your Letter of Claim dated 28 December 2018.

A SAR has been sent to Britannia Parking and, accordingly, I do not expect any further processing of this matter until a response is received from Britannia Parking.

Please acknowledge receipt of this advice by email.

Me

Is that all for now or should I include the fact that I dispute the debt and list the reasons citing Schedule 4 PoFA ? I would prefer to wait for the SAR response before listing reasons

Advice please.


2. I’ve also written to 3 MPs – 2 for Plymouth and my own MP
3. Letter written to the landowner.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Rule1949
post Thu, 17 Jan 2019 - 12:41
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29
Joined: 7 Jan 2019
Member No.: 101,754



Re post 11 I am in process of sorting the reply to the Bwlegal Letter of Claim shown at post 6 above.

I will mainly be citing POFA, Schedule 4, para 9 and the points raised in post2 .

Should I also at that stage include the conflicting information / allegation received from Bwlegal and Britannia ??

Bwlegal letter 12 Dec 2018 ( see post 6) states. “..failed to make a payment or raise an appeal within 28 days ….”

Britannia letter dated 27th April 2017 ( see post 1) state “ …Thank you for your appeal received on 22/04/2017”. The also provided a POPLA code.

The SAR response from Britannia should be interesting in this regard.

For those interested my user name is not to referring to 1949 rule(s). It refers to Rule Britannia !!

This post has been edited by Rule1949: Thu, 17 Jan 2019 - 13:23
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Thu, 17 Jan 2019 - 12:56
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,081
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



For BW - state there is no pressing need to process your data at this time, as the limitations act applies, and they have a further X years to commence proceedings. To refuse to restrict processing is unreasonable behaviour.

For SAR - remind them you expect to get all PERSONAL data within the one month
FOr the adiditonal info such as the landowner contract and copies of signs, you require these under the pre=action prootcol AND under the overiding objectives, as these will help narrow the areas under dispute.
Knowing that tthese WILL narrow the areas under dispute, to refuse to disclose these until the witness statements stage will be considered an AMBUSH by you as claimant, and you will instead apply for a court order requireing sequential service of WS and documents, while comenting the lack of consideration given by Britannia to the court.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Thu, 17 Jan 2019 - 13:22
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11,453
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



And the NTK is not compliant with the requirements to hold the keeper liable, several omissions.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Rule1949
post Tue, 5 Feb 2019 - 15:56
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29
Joined: 7 Jan 2019
Member No.: 101,754



Well, i't been quiet for the last 3 weeks. Received a positive response from my MP and a supporting call from the PA of one of the Plymouth MPs. Alas, nothing from the company that owns the car park.

Despite my request to Bwl to only contact me by mail or email they have tried to contact me by phone on 3 occasions in the past 3 weeks. ( Each time the phone rang for about 15 seconds _ not long enough for answerphone to engage but enough to be a nuisance. Needless to say but I didn't pick the phone up), I've has a robo email asking me to contact them but apart from telling them that I am still waiting for their client to respond to the SAR there is nothing polite that I want to say to them. So ne email sent to them.

Britannia received my SAR on 14th January. I have heard nothing from them since their acknowledgement. QUESTION - should I chase them ??? Personally I think not, - but I'm open to suggestions,
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Wed, 6 Feb 2019 - 10:58
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,081
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



They have 30 days to respond
Watch out - they may state they dont HAVE to respond as its been passed to BW -> we've seen this on MSE forum

This is a lie. THey MUST respond.
If they try that, complaint to the ICO then a STRONG demand pointing out their legal obligations under the DPA2018 are still in place.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Rule1949
post Wed, 13 Feb 2019 - 18:11
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29
Joined: 7 Jan 2019
Member No.: 101,754



SAR response ( Generated 12/2/19 ) received yesterday, Most of response was copies of items that I had previously received or sent with the exception of the ‘appeal’. A redacted copy of which is attached.
After almost 2 years I cannot remember the precise layout of the online form ( neither, regrettably did I take a screenshot of it ) but it was not in the form of a letter as this copy is. I do recall that I preceded the written bit with a heading clearly indicating that the submission was for information purposes. After all this time I cannot recall selecting DRIVER – I don’t recall seeing the option!!!

Question 1. Who or what is Zatpark ?? Clearly my personal date has been obtained by them (it) and then reassembled into the form shown.

Question 2. Is there any point in trying to get an original copy of this ‘appeal’

The following item(s) were not received with the response

Machine report – when Britannia acknowledged my SAR their robo reply advised “You are not entitled to transactions which do not relate to you, you will be provided with your transaction only. We are under no obligation to provide you with anything further.”
I think I should have received machine reports for both the entry and exit of the vehicle AND the report showing the ticket purchase all these things relate to my personal data.

Should I chase Britannia for the info as it was omitted from their reply ??? I resume that if the answer is yes they should provide it without payment of £10.

There was nothing relating to the following( the comment following each item is what Britannia stated in their robo reply
• Landowner agreement - You are not entitled to business sensitive information, it will only be supplied at court, as evidence and not before.
• Contract with the driver - The contract is on the signage in the car park. A copy of the signage will be provided as evidence at court.
• Picture packs - A copy of the signage will be provided as evidence at court.

Turning to Bwlegal
I acknowledged their Letter of Claim at the same time as I advised them that I had requested the SAR from Britannia and told them not to process the matter further until I had the SAR response from Britannia.
As Britannia took 29 days to generate the report I intend to tell Bwlegal tomorrow that I will respond in full to their Letter of Claim before 2nd March ( their LOC stated before 1/2/19 – 2nd March is 1/2/19 plus 29 days).
Any comments / advice appreciated


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cabbyman
post Wed, 13 Feb 2019 - 18:17
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,799
Joined: 15 Dec 2007
From: South of John O'Groats, north of Cape Town.
Member No.: 16,066



https://zatpark.com/about

You could go back to Britannia and say that as they are refusing to help narrow the issues, you will bring their unreasonable attitude to the attention of the court, should it proceed that far.

Await comments from others.


--------------------
Cabbyman 10 PPCs 0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Wed, 13 Feb 2019 - 19:37
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,081
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Indeed. And mention the court report that found that refusing to comply with the PAP was unreasonable behaviour.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Rule1949
post Thu, 14 Feb 2019 - 16:24
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29
Joined: 7 Jan 2019
Member No.: 101,754



I found the ZatPark website. Based just a few miles from me. Some sort of IT solution for assisting parking companies. I'm convinced that my original response has been'shortened'. Can anybody post a redacted copy of a ZatPark print in response to their SAT when a full blooded appeal has been made online???? ( Trying to see how much detail of an appeal is on the ZatPark form

I'll wait another 24 hours before writing again to Britannia. In meantime I have emailed BWLegal advising that I have not had a full response to my SAR soo they must continue to defer further processing until I have all the info.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V   1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Thursday, 19th September 2019 - 05:08
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.