Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Private Parking Solutions - BPA not learned their lesson?
FightBack Forums > Queries > Private Parking Tickets & Clamping
BFworks4PPC
Hi all.

Private Parking Solutions claim they are BPA members with right to access the DVLA database. They are new to the BPA so they must have been checked out and do everything properly. right? wrong! because their signs and website dont comply with the code. They are the typical clamper turned 'good guys' which you can expect but how can the BPA accept them in to the club without making sure that they comply with the basics. Lets see how long it takes for BPA/DVLA to take notice of this blog and either kick out PPS before they even get started or will they change their signs/website first!

By the way, Im new here but Im not hiding my 'connection' to the PPCs. I know how it works and not everyone that works for PPCs make a lot of money in fact most of the PPCs arent doing well at all.
prosnap
Can you provide a photo of the signs (that was taken within the last couple of weeks)
BFworks4PPC
Will do when I am next near the site. Apart from bad English the 'ticket price' is £110 which is higher than the code allows. Their web site still says 'penalty' when we all know it isn't one. DVLA suspended Met for implying something that isn't true so Im surprised BPA let them use the word penalty.
cobblers1
http://www.privateparkingsolutions.com/ind...w-to-pay-charge
QUOTE
PAYING YOUR PENALTY CHARGE NOTICE


Nice work!
DBC
From their website:-

The act also states that parking enforcement company can hold a contract with the driver in respect of parking charges. Due this legislation will end any uncertainty over the rights of parking companies after ruling in upper tax tribunal as this legalization is of a higher legal standing.PPS are members of British Parking Association and comply with their AOS Approved Operator Scheme therefore we are able to take advantage of the Protection of freedoms act 2012.

2 out of 10 for English, and 2 out of 10 for misunderstanding the law.
JagDriver
Odd that the PPS Legalities don't take you anywhere.
The Slithy Tove
QUOTE (DBC @ Mon, 29 Oct 2012 - 17:24) *
2 out of 10 for English, and 2 out of 10 for misunderstanding the law.

Surely that should be 8 out of 10 for misunderstanding the law (personally I'd put it nearer to 10/10).
nlucky
I called BPA and they said that Private Parking Solutions is not BPA Approved and not on AOS list. They applied for the membership but didn't get it yet.
So they are using BPA logo illegally. I also attached a picture of their sign.
Click to view attachment
A good example of dishonest private parking [Mod edit] company.
bama
To TS with them.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2008/1277/contents/made

Claiming to be a signatory to a code of conduct when the trader is not.

(SCHEDULE 1) is an Unfair practice and amounts to a criminal offence.

Codes of conduct. In relation to codes of conduct as defined, there are two scheduled
offences: falsely claiming to be a signatory to a code of conduct; or that the code has
an endorsement from a public or other body.

‘“Code of conduct” means an agreement or set of rules (which is not imposed by legal
or administrative requirements), which governs the behaviour of traders who undertake
to be bound by it in relation to one or more commercial practices or business sectors’ (reg 2).

The following classes of commercial practice are unfair (reg 3(5)(a)-©) and hence
prima facie amount to strict liability offences:
(I) Misleading actions (reg 5);
(ii) Misleading omissions (reg 6);
(iii) Aggressive practices (reg 7).

Misleading acts. Reg 5 explains when a practice is unfair because of what it positively
contains. Reg 5(1) stipulates that a commercial practice is ‘a misleading action’ if it
leads a ‘typical consumer’ to take a ‘transactional decision’ which he would not otherwise take
and falls within one of the following types:-
1. Misleading information generally. According to reg 5(2)(a), a commercial practice may fall
within this type - ‘if it contains false information and is therefore untruthful in relation to
any of the matters in paragraph (4) or if it or its overall presentation in any way deceives or
is likely to deceive the typical consumer in relation to any of the matters in that paragraph,
even if the information is factually correct’.
‘False information’ is defined as ‘untruthful’;
Concrete Jungle
QUOTE (DBC @ Mon, 29 Oct 2012 - 17:24) *
From their website:-

The act also states that parking enforcement company can hold a contract with the driver in respect of parking charges. Due this legislation will end any uncertainty over the rights of parking companies after ruling in upper tax tribunal as this legalization is of a higher legal standing.PPS are members of British Parking Association and comply with their AOS Approved Operator Scheme therefore we are able to take advantage of the Protection of freedoms act 2012.

2 out of 10 for English, and 2 out of 10 for misunderstanding the law.


It reads like it was written by whoever drafts the signs for ANPR Ltd.
Herbie
PRIVATE PARKING SOLUTIONS LTD.....This all seems very odd.

A weeks ago I made enquiries of 10 random companies listed an the BPA website and found so many serious irregularities. Some companies had never filed accounts and had applications against them at Companies House to be struck off. Others were not registered with the Information Commissioners Office and much more. This was "simple housekeeping" enquiries which the BPA should have carried out as a matter of course BEFORE allowing them AOS Membership.



Yet again, this particular company appear to be up to no good !!!

A very simple search on the Companies House website will confirm to any interested party that Private Parking Solutions Ltd WAS STRUCK OFF on 1st FEBRUARY 2011 and is now listed as DISSOLVED
bama
webiste is for
Private Parking Solutions (London) Ltd
as is the sign

check out their ICO details
Z3352243

"REQUESTING AND PROCESSING DATA PROVIDED FROM THE DVLA, IN RELATION TO VEHICLE
KEEPER DETAILS, FOR THE PURPOSE OF TRACING VEHICLE KEEPERS, ISSUING STATUTORY
NOTICE AND LETTERS.
"
lancsdriver
"Private Parking Solutions was formed in 2004, bringing many years of experience to our costumers"

Wow so these costumers, do they make uniforms for there little busy boddies giving out tickets?

Surely somebody is taking the piss, this is also from their website.

"providing car park management solutions for the whole London area, 24 hours per day, 365 days per year. Alternative times can be arranged as required.

What alternative have they in mind to every minute of every day??
bama
fewer would be an alternative
Herbie
On the website you will need to click on the link entitled ABOUT US. Scroll down to the bottom and you will see that under the company info it CLEARLY states the name of PRIVATE PARKING SOLUTIONS LTD but.......underneath this name there is a company registration number which is NOT for Private Parking Solutions Ltd but instead, is for PRIVATE PARKING SOLUTIONS (LONDON) Ltd.

Just how many errors does this company have on their website ????

bama
thats just a typo (maybe). its the company number that counts.

Wonder what the ICO would think of that Purpose 4...
JagDriver
Sorry for the thread resurrection, playing catchup.

IIRC company information on official documents has to present and accurate, so typo's won't do.
bama
not sure that a website IS a "company document"
(guess I should know that...)
Gan
Private Parking Solutions Ltd (Reg : 05853218) dissolved in February 2011
Private Parking Solutions (London) Ltd (Reg : 07437253 ) formed in November 2010

Can't find obvious links between past and present directors or owners but when I see a questionable PPC appear at about the same time as a similarly named clamper disappears along with its CCJs a few miles away I'm naturally suspicious.

My understanding is that websites are "documents" and have the same requirements to identify the company as a business letter :

Company name, registered address and registration number
bama
You may well be right Gan

You know whats coming next...


Citation ?
Gan
Can't find electronic form mentioned in the original Companies Act 2006 S.82 but the Companies House website makes it clear that disclosure applies to any means that the company uses to provide information to customers

http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/infoAndGu...sclosures.shtml

It also comes under Electronic Commerce (EC Directive) Regulation 2002 whether the company is actually trading through the site or not.
bama
Yep. am familiar with the directive
just never seen where/if it has been statutised. (statutised ? wtf ? you know what I mean)
Gan
QUOTE (bama @ Fri, 30 Nov 2012 - 19:06) *
Yep. am familiar with the directive
just never seen where/if it has been statutised. (statutised ? wtf ? you know what I mean)

S.I.2002 No. 2013

http://www.bis.gov.uk/files/file14640.pdf
bama
Ta,
will take some reading/x-referencing
no time for that at the mo' sad.gif
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2024 Invision Power Services, Inc.