PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

"Parking infringement" at Lichfield Trent Valley 24 January 2018
reluctantdecorat...
post Sun, 18 Feb 2018 - 20:53
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17
Joined: 16 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,591



Apologies if this looks like the many other posts on this forum, but having felt very clear over what to do I am now feeling somewhat confused.

The driver parked for two days at Lichfield Trent Valley Station with two one-day tickets bought online the night before.

When the driver got to the station there were no spaces, so parked at the end of a row, between one car in a bay and one car beyond the end of the row. There were many cars parked as in the same way, either single or double parked outside of marked spaces.

On the driver's return on the evening of the second day there was a "Penalty Notice" from Indigo Parking Solutions on the windscreen, quoting Rail Bylaw 14, giving as a reason Breach Code 3 - Parked in an unauthorised area.

Looking around there were a few cars with Penalty Notices, but even more not in marked bays without Penalty Notices. The driver photographed four of the cars without Penalty Notices, hopefully in such a way as not to show the number plates, but to show the lack of bay markings. That appears to show a complete lack of regard for any losses that the company may have suffered.

The rear of the Penalty Notice states that "Disputes pertaining to the aforementioned appeals process maybe (sic) referred to the "Parking on Private Land Appeal Service". However, as I was paying for the tickets, I spotted a notice in passing, not obvious so don't know why I spotted it, that POPLA doesn't apply to this car park.

When challenging the "Penalty Notice", I was going to use the template on the MSE Newbie Thread duly modified, see below.

Re Penalty Notice number:

I am the keeper of the vehicle which received this purported "Penalty Notice". There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. I am not liable and I believe that your signs fail the test of "large lettering" and prominence, as established in ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis. Your unremarkable and obscure signs are in small print and the onerous terms are not readable.

Should you fail to cancel this PCN immediately, I require the following information with your template rejection:

1. Does your charge represent damages for breach of contract? Answer yes or no.
2. Please provide dated photos of the signs that you say were on site, which you contend formed a contract
3. Please provide all photographs taken of this vehicle.

I am alarmed by your contact and I do not give you consent to process any data relating to me, or this vehicle. I deny liability and will not respond to debt collectors. You must consider this letter a Section 10 Notice under the DPA, and should you fail to respond accordingly, your company will be reported to the Information Commissioner.

I have kept proof of submission of this appeal and will also be making a formal complaint to your client landowner.

If you are a current BPA member, send me a POPLA code. If you are an IPC firm, cease and desist with all contact.

Yours faithfully,[/i]

Name and address of Registered Keeper

As I bought the ticket online, how relevant is this to the driver concerned? I cannot see the relevance of the notices in the car park, although there are no clear signs on the way in.

In light of the post from Dramaqueen in the Flamepit on Indigo Parking's use of the DVLA and subsequent discussions I decided not to wait for the NTK see link below:
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showto...p;#entry1352640 .

I don't know if it's relevant, the car park shown on the website is the one on the northbound trackside. The car was parked on the car park on the southbound trackside. The tickets that are available for purchase both online and on the station seem to be accepted for both car parks, although the online ticket states it is for the Station Approach car park, i.e. on the northbound side.

I looked at Lynnzer's example "dispute" letter but as the dispute seems to be at a different stage it can't be used.

Any help would be appreciated. Deadline for submission of the dispute on the suggested timescales is tomorrow, Monday 19 February. I think I have been puzzling over this for too long so my request is a bit late. Sorry.

This post has been edited by reluctantdecorator: Mon, 19 Feb 2018 - 17:12
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 39)
Advertisement
post Sun, 18 Feb 2018 - 20:53
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
reluctantdecorat...
post Thu, 10 May 2018 - 09:56
Post #21


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17
Joined: 16 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,591



In response to ManxRed, and with thanks to SchoolRunMum, the request to the DVLA came from Indigo Park Solutions UK Ltd.

I have attached a copy of the DVLA response.

It lists the enquiry reason as "Breach of terms and conditions of a private car park"

Is that the same as a car park on railway land? Just curious.
Attached File(s)
Attached File  DVLA_Response_180504.pdf ( 39.07K ) Number of downloads: 62
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Thu, 10 May 2018 - 12:04
Post #22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,126
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



Now complain to the DVLA that Indigo has provided a false reason for making an electronic enquiry
The Penalty Notice was not issued for a breach of terms and conditions but for an alleged breach of the Railway Byelaws

Requests for the keeper details to issue Penalty Notices under the Railway Byelaws must be made as a paper application using Form V888/3

Ask that Indigo is suspended from access to the keeper database until the investigation has been completed

I can see potential for complaints about Indigo and the DVLA to the ICO if action isn't taken

This post has been edited by Redivi: Thu, 10 May 2018 - 12:06
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ManxRed
post Thu, 10 May 2018 - 12:07
Post #23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,985
Joined: 20 Aug 2008
Member No.: 21,992



Include a copy of the penalty notice to back this up.

Does this potentially breach the second principle of the DPA, in terms of fibbing about the purpose of the data request?


--------------------
Sometimes I use big words I don't understand in an effort to make myself sound more photosynthesis.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Thu, 10 May 2018 - 12:17
Post #24


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,126
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



Meant to say to include the evidence

Personal data shall be obtained only for one or more specified and lawful purposes, and shall not be further processed in any manner incompatible with that purpose or those purposes.

Looks like a breach to me

Breach of terms and conditions implies that Indigo is trying to recover a debt, not threaten the keeper with a visit to the magistrates
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
reluctantdecorat...
post Thu, 10 May 2018 - 12:28
Post #25


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17
Joined: 16 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,591



Thank you, she will do that.

Is it the same department as before, or is there a separate complaints department that should be contacted?

Incidentally, having read the form V888/3, it specifically talks about the request being made by the owner of the land or an agent for the owner of the land. That made me wonder who actually owns railway land? Is it the railway company or is it Network Rail?

I understood that Indigo work on behalf of West Midlands Trains, the train operating company, not Network Rail. The franchise has just changed and I would be surprised that ownership of all of the stations and associated car parks has just suddenly gone over to a new franchisee. However, maybe they have.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
reluctantdecorat...
post Fri, 18 May 2018 - 06:28
Post #26


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17
Joined: 16 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,591



Apologies for asking such a question, but I have had several attempts to draft the letter to the DVLA "complaining" about the false enquiry and I cannot get the right tone or content.

Do you have a suggested draft I can crib, please.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Fri, 18 May 2018 - 09:17
Post #27


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,687
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Just post a draft here
More likely to get feedback useful to you than a template, which I dont think exists

The tone is fairly simple - Indigo falsaely declared the reason for the request, in order to use the electornic system. You request the DVLA investigates this and ANY request made by Indigo from Railway grounds, as yo ususpect all will have been made electronically instead of via the correct channels. This repersents a data proteciton breach as the data was requested with the wrong cause, and has not been processed according to eh cause it was requested for.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
reluctantdecorat...
post Fri, 18 May 2018 - 15:27
Post #28


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17
Joined: 16 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,591



The QDR first letter has now arrived, copy attached. It is somewhat earlier than I was anticipating. Are they escalating their timescales?

Thanks Nosferatu. I will do that.
Attached File(s)
Attached File  QDR_First_Letter_180514_000080.pdf ( 80.62K ) Number of downloads: 55
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Fri, 18 May 2018 - 17:46
Post #29


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,687
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Possibly hoping t9 get cash before they're shut down
Just ignore them, or ask how an offer to avoid prosecution can possibly increase in cost.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
reluctantdecorat...
post Fri, 25 May 2018 - 09:18
Post #30


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17
Joined: 16 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,591



Draft for DVLA as suggested. It's taken a while to get it feel right. I don't feel happy with the address.

DVLA Vehicle Record Enquiries Section
Longview Road
Morriston
Swansea
SA99 1AJ

25 May 2018

Dear Sirs,

Re: Reference

Thank you for your response of Date to my initial enquiry of Date, copy attached.

I wish to make a formal complaint in that I believe that Indigo Park Solutions UK Ltd has provided a false reason for their electronic enquiry.

Attached is a copy of the original "Penalty Notice" which indicates that it was not issued for a "breach of Terms and Conditions" but was actually issued for an alleged breach of a railway bylaw. This is an entirely separate reason altogether.

Also, requests for keeper details where an alleged breach is under a railway bylaw must be made as a paper application using Form V888/3.

It would appear that Indigo Park Solutions UK Ltd have falsely declared the reason for the request at least in part in order to use the electronic system. I must therefore request the DVLA investigates this and ANY request made by Indigo Park Solutions UK Ltd for keeper details for alleged offences on Railway grounds, as I suspect all of them will have been made electronically, giving incorrect reasons, instead of via the correct channels with correct reasons.

In the light of recent publicity around the GDPR, I believe this represents a serious data protection breach as the data was requested with the wrong cause, and has therefore been processed inappropriately.

I must also request that DVLA urgently suspend Indigo Park Solutions UK Ltd from accessing the keeper database with immediate effect until such time as the investigation is concluded.

If swift action is not taken, unfortunately I feel that I will have no option but to take my complaint about Indigo Park Solutions UK Ltd and DVLA to the ICO.

Yours faithfully,



Suggestions for improvements would be gratefully received.

N.B. I have made some changes as suggested and they are shown in bold.

Many thanks.

This post has been edited by reluctantdecorator: Fri, 25 May 2018 - 19:18
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ManxRed
post Fri, 25 May 2018 - 09:33
Post #31


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,985
Joined: 20 Aug 2008
Member No.: 21,992



I'm wondering if a cheeky reference to GDPR might focus their minds even more.


--------------------
Sometimes I use big words I don't understand in an effort to make myself sound more photosynthesis.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Pensioner
post Fri, 25 May 2018 - 10:30
Post #32


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 124
Joined: 22 Jul 2017
Member No.: 93,141



QUOTE (reluctantdecorator @ Fri, 25 May 2018 - 10:18) *
Draft for DVLA as suggested. It's taken a while to get it feel right. I don't feel happy with the address.

DVLA Vehicle Record Enquiries Section
Longview Road
Morriston
Swansea
SA99 1AJ

25 May 2018

Dear Sirs,

Re: Reference

Thank you for your response of Date to my initial enquiry of Date, copy attached.

I wish to make a formal complaint in that I believe that Indigo Park Solutions UK Ltd has provided a false reason for their electronic enquiry.

Attached is a copy of the original "Penalty Notice" which indicates that it was not issued for a "breach of Terms and Conditions" but was actually issued for an alleged breach of a railway bylaw. This is an entirely separate reason altogether.

Also, requests for keeper details where an alleged breach is under a railway bylaw must be made as a paper application using Form V888/3.

It would appear that Indigo Park Solutions UK Ltd have falsely declared the reason for the request in order to use the electronic system. I must therefore request the DVLA investigates this and ANY request made by Indigo Park Solutions UK Ltd for keeper details for alleged offences on Railway grounds, as I suspect all of them will have been made electronically instead of via the correct channels.

This represents a data protection breach as the data was requested with the wrong cause, and has not been processed according to the cause it was requested for.

I must also request that DVLA suspend Indigo Park Solutions UK Ltd from accessing the keeper database with immediate effect until such time as the investigation is concluded.

If swift action is not taken, unfortunately I feel that I will have no option but to take my complaint about Indigo Park Solutions UK Ltd and DVLA to the ICO.

Yours faithfully,



Suggestions for improvements would be gratefully received.

Many thanks.


This post has been edited by Pensioner: Fri, 25 May 2018 - 10:33
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
reluctantdecorat...
post Fri, 25 May 2018 - 20:42
Post #33


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17
Joined: 16 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,591



Amended copy above, in case it's not clear.

Thanks to Pensioner and ManxRed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dramaqueen
post Sat, 26 May 2018 - 08:01
Post #34


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 334
Joined: 1 Jul 2014
From: east sussex
Member No.: 71,587



In November 2015 the DVLA declared they would not release data for breach of contract enforcement on railway land until they had confirmation that the contract model of enforcement was lawful.

It's on page 5 of this FOIR disclosure, where discussions on this point began: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/3306..._passthrough=1)
They have been asked for a copy of any such confirmation and don't have it.

In January last year another meeting was called by the BPA to discuss the Byelaws. The letter of invitation states:
"You may be aware that Government has dictated that parking at railway stations may ONLY be enforced via the Byelaws."

So it's a matter of deep concern that the DVLA are releasing data to Indigo, whether manually or electronically, in circumstances when they and the BPA have said they wouldn't.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Pensioner
post Sat, 26 May 2018 - 08:35
Post #35


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 124
Joined: 22 Jul 2017
Member No.: 93,141



QUOTE (reluctantdecorator @ Fri, 25 May 2018 - 21:42) *
Amended copy above, in case it's not clear.

Thanks to Pensioner and ManxRed.


Just a small one.

Railway ground. Should be "Railway Land enforced by Statutory Byelaws"


I think that's right but someone will shout if not.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
reluctantdecorat...
post Mon, 28 May 2018 - 18:49
Post #36


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17
Joined: 16 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,591



Thank you to everyone who has contributed.

Below is the final version which will be posted tomorrow.

DVLA Vehicle Record Enquiries Section
Longview Road
Morriston
Swansea
SA99 1AJ

28 May 2018

Dear Sirs,

Re: VRM

Thank you for your response of Date to my initial enquiry of Date, copy attached.

I wish to make a formal complaint in that I believe that Indigo Park Solutions UK Ltd has provided a false reason for their electronic enquiry.

Attached is a copy of the original "Penalty Notice" which indicates that it was not issued for a "breach of Terms and Conditions" but was actually issued for an alleged breach of a railway bylaw. This is an entirely separate reason altogether.

Also, requests for keeper details where an alleged breach is under a railway bylaw must be made as a paper application using Form V888/3, i.e. not electronically.

It would appear that Indigo Park Solutions UK Ltd have falsely declared the reason for the request in order to use the electronic system. I must therefore request that the DVLA investigates this and ANY request made by Indigo Park Solutions UK Ltd for keeper details for alleged offences on Railway Land enforced by Statutory Byelaws, as I suspect all of them will have been made electronically instead of via the correct channels and giving the incorrect reason for the request.

This represents a data protection breach as the data was requested with the wrong cause, and has therefore not been processed according to the cause appropriate to the alleged offence.

I must also request that DVLA urgently suspend Indigo Park Solutions UK Ltd from access to the keeper database with immediate effect until such time as the investigation is concluded.

It would also be helpful to be informed whether the DVLA has now received confirmation that the contract model of enforcement between Indigo Park Solutions UK Ltd and their client was lawful.

If swift action is not taken, unfortunately I feel that I will have no option but to take my complaint about Indigo Park Solutions UK Ltd and DVLA to the ICO.

Yours faithfully,

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
reluctantdecorat...
post Thu, 21 Jun 2018 - 15:20
Post #37


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17
Joined: 16 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,591



The DVLA responded on 19 June to my wife's letter of 28 May, it arrived in the post received today.

The Complaints Officer rejected the assertion that the request was made falsely, see attached letter, stating that Indigo "are allowed to use the electronic route for offences involving bylaws when it comes to parking".

I have looked at the latest document titled "giving people information from our record", published by DVLA, MIS56, Rev May 2018 and there is no mention of Bylaw offences in Section 22, page 25.

Also there was a 22 May revision to the DVLA information request Form V888/3.

None of this sounds right in the context of the FOI request information, unless there has been a lot of progress recently between DfT, DVLA and the parking companies.

This post has been edited by reluctantdecorator: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 - 17:32
Attached File(s)
Attached File  DVLA_Response_180619.pdf ( 32.49K ) Number of downloads: 39
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Fri, 22 Jun 2018 - 06:55
Post #38


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,687
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



You should go back and ask them to state where this allowance is made, as the public documentaiton does not allow this, and cite YOUR sources.

You require them to detaiul exatly the clause that allows this.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
reluctantdecorat...
post Tue, 24 Jul 2018 - 22:10
Post #39


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17
Joined: 16 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,591



Many thanks for the comment.

It's taken a while, but I have drafted the following after a lot of reading and head scratching. I would be grateful for comments please as I think it's a bit thin.

Paul Timms
DVLA Complaints Team
Longview Road
Morriston
Swansea
SA6 7JL

XX July 2018

Dear Mr Timms,

Re: Reg and Model

Thank you for your response of XX Jun to my complaint of YY May. Please accept my apologies for the delay in getting back to you, we have been away on holiday.

I note your comment that Indigo Park Solutions UK Limited "are allowed to use the electronic route for offences involving bylaws when it comes to parking".

Could you please state exactly where and when where this allowance was made, as it appears from the publicly available documentation that this is specifically disallowed.

For example, on the Government website, www.gov.uk/request-information-from-dvla it states that a company can request information about a vehicle in the following circumstances providing they have reasonable cause:

• finding out who was responsible for an accident
• tracing the registered keeper of an abandoned vehicle
• tracing the registered keeper of a vehicle parked on private land
• giving out parking tickets
• giving out trespass charge notices
• tracing people responsible for driving off without paying for goods and services
• tracing people suspected of insurance fraud

None of those includes tracing the driver of a vehicle for an alleged breach of a bylaw on railway land, which is NOT private land.

As a further matter, the use of Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA) on a bye-law controlled area is not available to Indigo Park Solutions UK Limited. The land is defined as not being relevant land in accordance with PoFA so only a driver has any liability in that case. They cannot invoke Keeper Liability under PoFA. It simply falls outside of the scope of PoFA.

In any case, it is quite evident that Indigo Park Solutions UK Limited have acted unlawfully in obtaining my personal details where they had no reasonable cause. The acquisition and use of my personal details is a breach of the principles of the Data Protection Act which is unlawful.

In addition, Indigo Park Solutions UK Limited Indigo Park Solutions UK Limited should only request data from the DVLA for the purposes defined in its KADOE contract with the DVLA. I understand that this contract specifies that data is made available for the purpose of pursuing "parking charges". Indigo Park Solutions UK Limited's KADOE contract defines what is meant by "parking charges", and this definition does not include using the charge to avoid a criminal prosecution, as on the "Penalty Charge Notice" on my original letter.

I look forward to hearing from you shortly.

Yours sincerely,


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
emanresu
post Wed, 25 Jul 2018 - 04:45
Post #40


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11,094
Joined: 24 Aug 2007
From: Home alone
Member No.: 13,324



I would draw the DVLA's notice to the comment about Indigo taking private criminal proceedings.

There is no way Indigo who are not covered by Byelaws can lay papers on behalf of a TOC - doing so would itself be criminal under the Legal Services Act. Indigo themselves are responsible for the actions of ZZPS and such misrepresentation should be investigated. The owner of ZZPS has been banned by the Financial Conduct Authority in the past for such misrepresentation, and this is something that the DVLA would be aware of.

Question is does the DVLA wish to allow such action by Indigo and what is there reason for doing so.

IMHO this should be escalated

This post has been edited by emanresu: Wed, 25 Jul 2018 - 04:46
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: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 13:01
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.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here