Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: The DVLA Justifies Giving Your Info To PPC's
FightBack Forums > Discussion > Government Policy
John Lodge
Anyone contacting the DVLA to ask how they justify issuing their private data to the parking companies will be told that information is passed if there is a justifiable or reasonable cause to request it. They further justify this by saying that if any company'requesting info is a member of a governing body, i.e. the BPA for example, they are following a code of practice and by virtue of the DVLA's definition this bestows a justifiable and reasonable cause.
The BPA say that any PPC issuing PCN's must have a contract with the land owner or the managing agent, if not, they are in breach of the BPA's code of practice.
There is plenty of information on this forum that suggests that many PPC's don't have this contractual right.
This begs the question of how thoroughly the BPA vett their members - This is very important as the DVLA's position stated above is invalid and any PPC in breach of their code of practice would not be entitled to the DVLA's data. On the face of it this is clear cut but the problem is that the DVLA don't police PPC's, the BPA do.
I am currently awaiting responses from the Department of Transport and the DVLA on this but I would like to hear any opinions on this.
Ah, you've ordered the 'BPA are very tough and award sanction points to any member not adhering to the code of practice' template letter then.
I have requested info re this subject from DVLA and also had the obligatory sanctions letter from BOA. Writing to them both again today. Maybe we need to start a thread and push forum members to use the BPA COMPLAINTS procedure and see if we can get the so called 12 points in 12 months awarded, if a Christmas nber 1 can be done using online forums then surely 12 points will be easy to do.
It's a token system though. Nobody will get the 12 points.

The only time a PPC has ever been kicked out was when the BPA turned up and they'd shut up shop. So there needs to be a personal affront to the BPA before anybody is exterminated!

Even PPCs that get 3 month bans from the DVLA for unlawful signage are still operating!

With a 'competitor' in the game now I suspect sanction points won't be so easy.

Just imagine if some of the big players left for the IPC...
It'll be interesting to see how strict the new AOS is.

Not very, is my guess.

Meanwhile, more revenue for the DVLA. Trebles all round.
The Slithy Tove
Considering that most (if not all) PPCs break the BPA Ltd AOS Code of Practice all the time, one wonders why they are allowed DVLA access at all. The DVLA are complicit in this highly dodgy practice in that they simply pass over responsibility for compliance to the CoP to a private company which has no accountability and which, by its very definition, acts only in the interest of its members. Somehow the DVLA seem to think this is OK
You'll get nowhere writing to the DVLA, DfT or even the ICO. They are all complicit and they have all long forgotten who pays their wages.

The only avenue where I get any interest and concern is my MP, but I am reluctant to overdo the blizzard of complaints I send her about the parking industry!
D P Dance
I have a thick file about a complaint to DVLA elevated to the ICO, they kept turning me down and I kept taking it higher. It must have cost them hundreds of pounds to reply. If everyone did the same then the ICO might take some action.
I have received a demand for money from Civil Enforcement for parking in
XXXXX XXXX whilst whilst shopping there,

I wish to know why you are selling my details to a 3rd party, breaking the Data protection act,

how would you feel if some person got hold of your close family details by just paying you money,

one day you will sell details to a person who commits a violent act and you will be held culpable

I want to be absolutely clear and ensure that you understand that this is not a dispute about parking this is a complaint regarding the misuse and abuse of the registered keepers personal and private data.


Thank you for your email of XX November to Simon Tse about the release of information from the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) vehicle register. Oliver Morley is now the DVLA’s Chief Executive and he has asked me to respond on his behalf.

The DVLA takes the protection and security of its data very seriously and has procedures in place to ensure data is disclosed only where it is lawful and fair to do so and where the provisions of the Data Protection Act are met. The law allows information about a registered keeper of a vehicle to be release to third parties that can demonstrate a reasonable cause to receive it. Reasonable cause is not defined in legislation but the Government’s policy is that it should relate to the vehicle or its use following incidents where there may be liability on the part of the driver. Guidance on what constitutes reasonable cause is published online at

It is the motorist’s choice to park a vehicle on private land and their responsibility to ensure that they do so in accordance with the terms and conditions set out on signage displayed in the car park. If it is alleged that the terms of the contract are breached, it is considered reasonable that vehicle keeper details may be released in order to enable the landowner or his agent to pursue their legal rights and to resolve disputes.

The DVLA has a range of measures in place to ensure that all companies are subject to appropriate controls and safeguards. All car parking companies requesting keeper data must be members of a DVLA Accredited Trade Association (ATA), which has a mandatory code of practice that all members must adhere to. The purpose of requiring a company to be a member of an ATA is to ensure that those who request DVLA information are legitimate companies that operate with a code of practice. The code of practice promotes fair treatment of the motorist and ensures that there is a clear set of standards for operators.

The company in question, Civil Enforcement Ltd, is a member of the British Parking Association (BPA) which is an Accredited Trade Association for the parking industry. The BPA’s code of practice is published on its website at under the heading “Approved Operators Scheme”. If a member of this scheme does not comply with the code of practice, it may be suspended or expelled, during which time no data will be provided to it by the DVLA. If you feel that any of the practices used by the company do not comply with the code of practice you may wish to contact the BPA, Stuart House, 41-43 Perrymount Road, Haywards Heath, RH16 3BN.

Private car parking companies receive the information on the condition that it will only be used in connection with an enquiry relating to identifying a driver following an alleged parking contravention on private land; it cannot be further processed for any other purpose. DVLA’s Audit teams visit external data users to ensure information is requested only where appropriate and is used in accordance with their agreement with DVLA.

The most recent audit by the Information Commissioner’s Office judged that the procedures and processes the DVLA has in place offers high assurance to mitigate the risks of non-compliance with the Data Protection Act.

I can assure you that the fees levied by the Agency seek to recover the costs of processing requests for vehicle keeper information so that the cost is borne by the requestor and not passed onto the general taxpayer.

I hope this explains the Agency’s position on this matter.

Yours sincerely

Kevin Watts
Corporate Affairs
QUOTE (albert2008 @ Wed, 18 Dec 2013 - 14:54) *
If a member of this scheme does not comply with the code of practice, it may be suspended or expelled, during which time no data will be provided to it by the DVLA. If you feel that any of the practices used by the company do not comply with the code of practice you may wish to contact the BPA, Stuart House, 41-43 Perrymount Road, Haywards Heath, RH16 3BN.

Now, is Kevin actually going into print and lying here, or do we think he genuinely doesn't know that this is complete rubbish? I note his use of the word 'may', which I guess he is hoping that we don't realise includes the word 'won't'.

It's scandalous.
It's the same bullcrap that the DVLA have been churning out for quite a while now. They are completely focused on maximising revenue from selling RK data, everything else is secondary to that.
and for £2.50 a pop.
somehow it reminds me of the story about GBS which ends with him saying
"We have established what you are, all we are discussing is the price"
It is worth noting that there has been an oh so subtle shift in the DVLA's position on what demonstrates reasonable cause for unfettered electronic access (for PPCs)

For the last couple of years it had already been watered down to a requirement to (i) have membership of an ATA (for the PPC sector) and (ii) comply with the Code of Practice.

This has shifted in the last few months to become (i) membership of an ATA (for the PPC sector) (ii) and generally comply with the Code of Practice.

..........and if you haven't guessed it already, all of those occasions where non-compliance with the CoP have been pointed out to them haven't been serious enough (even if accepted as breaches) to adversely impact on reasonable cause.

You can see where this is going can't you...........
Maybe I'll 'generally' comply with VED and send them £50 and a book token.
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 © 2001-2020 Invision Power Services, Inc.