Bounce
Mon, 14 Mar 2016 - 21:59
Finally one of the family has got a Civil Parking Charge Notice from these guys. Is the current position in Scotland just to ignore or is the best course of action to refuse to name the driver? Not sure how up-to-date the flowchart is on the sticky.
Thanks in advance.
B
ostell
Mon, 14 Mar 2016 - 22:00
Yes, Just ignore in Scotland
SchoolRunMum
Mon, 14 Mar 2016 - 23:05
But always complain to the retailer (CEO of Lidl) to get it cancelled to stop the stupid debt collector threatograms and put it to bed.
Lynnzer
Tue, 15 Mar 2016 - 10:36
QUOTE (Bounce @ Mon, 14 Mar 2016 - 21:59)
Finally one of the family has got a Civil Parking Charge Notice from these guys. Is the current position in Scotland just to ignore or is the best course of action to refuse to name the driver? Not sure how up-to-date the flowchart is on the sticky.
Thanks in advance.
B
Ignore. They will need to prove who the driver was if they progress it a court claim.
Scotland is great for these sort of things. Not only is there any use of PoFA to pin down the registered keeper, they also fail on NIP's for speeding charges too if you send them back unsigned.
Bounce
Wed, 16 Mar 2016 - 11:54
I presume we should expect a raft of threatening letters and fake solicitors letters before they give up?
nosferatu1001
Wed, 16 Mar 2016 - 12:14
Yes. However dont ignore a REAL letter before action (Either titled such, or "WILL" take action in X days) or REAL court papers.
Bounce
Tue, 3 May 2016 - 14:58
I missed the second letter in the chain as I believe the other half binned it
The latest letter is a final demand addressed to the RK with the phrase "You were the driver" on it. I presume they have shot themselves in the foot here as since the ticket was issued using ANPR they have no idea who the driver was and can't say that the RK was the driver - correct? And I guess in Scotland the RK doesn't have to tell them?
Is it still ignore or ask them why they think the RK was the driver?
Jlc
Tue, 3 May 2016 - 15:13
I would tell the DVLA asap that they are misusing personal information.
They cannot state the keeper was driving.
They can ask who was driving or they can pursue the keeper under the presumption they were driving but they cannot state the above which I presume is a templated letter.
Spudandros
Tue, 3 May 2016 - 16:39
QUOTE (Bounce @ Tue, 3 May 2016 - 15:58)
I missed the second letter in the chain as I believe the other half binned it
The latest letter is a final demand addressed to the RK with the phrase "You were the driver" on it. I presume they have shot themselves in the foot here as since the ticket was issued using ANPR they have no idea who the driver was and can't say that the RK was the driver - correct? And I guess in Scotland the RK doesn't have to tell them?
Is it still ignore or ask them why they think the RK was the driver?
Ignore. No keeper liability in Scotland and no requirement to identify driver. Google VCS vs Robb Dundee 2015. It should throw up the Courier report where the case was booted out because VCS had failed to identify the driver. Their "reasonable assumption" went down like a lead balloon.
emanresu
Wed, 4 May 2016 - 05:01
Any chance of a copy of that letter washed for personal details?
Bounce
Tue, 17 May 2016 - 07:15
Hi,
Sorry about the late reply - scanner issues. Attached is a scan of the "You were the driver" letter. It seems they are assuming that the RK was the driver now.
The Rookie
Tue, 17 May 2016 - 07:37
Yup, complain....
emanresu
Tue, 17 May 2016 - 07:54
Copy in the IPC too and when you complain to the DVLA point out that all paperwork that comes from Athena will have been vetted by the IPC. This points out that lack of competence at the IPC yet again.
Jlc
Tue, 17 May 2016 - 08:17
Stunning.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.