DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 69377--------------------------------------------------
Re: APCOA - No Valid Payment - Railway Byelaws Bedford Station
DIR By: G6PRK
Date: April 30, 2025, 8:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I did send the email to my MP - no response. Will follow up.
Just a point of clarification, they did not in this case look up
my information with the DVLA. The keeper of the vehicle was my
friend's employer (F&F lease scheme). That business then passed
my details to APCOA.
Does this change the nature of the complaint?
--
On the SAR point, I also refuse to provide ID in the form of
Driving License? They have demanded both not one or the other.
Many thanks
#Post#: 69382--------------------------------------------------
Re: APCOA - No Valid Payment - Railway Byelaws Bedford Station
DIR By: b789
Date: April 30, 2025, 9:06 am
---------------------------------------------------------
DO NOT provide any photo ID, ever! Just do as I have mentioned
in my previous post.
For the DVLA complaint text part of the webform change it to the
following:
--- Quote ---
> I am submitting a formal complaint against APCOA Parking (UK)
Ltd, a BPA AOS member with DVLA KADOE access, for breaching the
Private Parking Sector Single Code of Practice (PPSCoP) and
misusing personal data obtained in reliance upon DVLA-supplied
keeper information.
>
> While APCOA did not obtain my data directly from the DVLA, the
entire enforcement process was initiated using DVLA data
provided under the KADOE contract to the registered keeper — a
lease company. That keeper then passed on my details to APCOA.
From that point forward, APCOA used my personal data to pursue
what they described as a statutory “Penalty Notice” under
railway byelaws, implying criminal liability.
>
> However, in response to a formal complaint, APCOA have now
admitted that their “Penalty Notices” are not statutory
penalties, but civil claims based on private contract law. They
also confirmed that funds collected are retained by themselves
or the landowner, not paid to the public purse — proving these
are not fines issued by or on behalf of a prosecuting authority.
>
> This is a damning admission. APCOA instigated the process
using DVLA data under the false pretence of statutory
enforcement, only to later reframe the charge as a civil
contractual matter once challenged. This constitutes a clear
breach of the KADOE contract and PPSCoP, both of which prohibit
misleading representations and require that DVLA data be used
for a lawful, clearly defined, and Code-compliant purpose.
>
> The DVLA, as data controller, remains responsible for ensuring
that personal data released under KADOE is not subsequently
misused — including by downstream parties acting on the back of
that disclosure. This complaint concerns not just the initial
release of data, but its subsequent use in a manner that may
amount to unlawful processing and potentially criminal
misrepresentation.
>
> I have attached a supporting statement with evidence and
request a full investigation into this matter. Please confirm
receipt and provide a reference number for this complaint.
--- End Quote ---
Then you change the following in the PDF file for the formal
complaint itself:
--- Quote ---
> SUPPORTING STATEMENT
>
> Complaint to DVLA – Breach of KADOE Contract and PPSCoP
>
> Operator name: APCOA Parking (UK) Ltd
> Date of Penalty Notice issue: [INSERT DATE]
> Vehicle registration: [INSERT VRM]
>
> I am submitting this complaint to report a misuse of my
personal data by APCOA Parking (UK) Ltd, who obtained my keeper
details from the DVLA under the KADOE (Keeper At Date Of Event)
contract.
>
> Although my own personal data was not supplied directly by the
DVLA, APCOA initiated enforcement based on DVLA data they
received for the registered keeper — a lease company. That
keeper then passed my details to APCOA, who processed my data in
reliance upon the DVLA-supplied information. All subsequent
action taken by APCOA, including the issue of a “Penalty Notice”
and the pursuit of payment, was conducted under the authority
they derive from the KADOE framework. As such, they remain fully
bound by the terms of that contract and the Private Parking
Sector Single Code of Practice (PPSCoP).
>
> While APCOA may have had reasonable cause to request my data
initially, they subsequently used it to issue a document styled
as a “Penalty Notice” for an alleged breach of Railway Byelaws.
The notice mimicked the form and language of a statutory
penalty, implied criminal liability, and threatened escalation
under Byelaw 14(1).
>
> However, in a formal written complaint response dated [INSERT
DATE], APCOA made the following admissions:
>
> [indent]• The “Penalty Notice” is not a statutory enforcement
measure, but a civil matter based on private contract law.
> • Enforcement is pursued under contract law and not through
the railway byelaw criminal framework.
> • Revenue from the notice is retained by APCOA or the
landowner—not remitted to the public purse—confirming it is not
a fine issued by a prosecuting authority.[/indent]
>
> These admissions expose a clear deception: keeper data
obtained under the pretext of enforcing statutory railway
offences was instead used to pursue what APCOA now claims is a
private contractual matter. This amounts to a misuse of personal
data, a breach of the Private Parking Sector Single Code of
Practice (PPSCoP), and a violation of the terms of the KADOE
contract.
>
> More seriously, this conduct raises significant concerns under
the Fraud Act 2006, specifically Section 2 – false
representation. APCOA knowingly represented a private civil
charge as a statutory “Penalty Notice” in order to induce
payment from a motorist under threat of criminal consequences.
This is not a minor procedural failing or mere miscommunication;
it is arguably a criminal offence, and it must be treated as
such.
>
> As the Data Controller, the DVLA bears direct responsibility
for ensuring that personal data it supplies under KADOE is:
>
> [indent]• Used lawfully and fairly
> • Not processed for misleading or deceptive purposes
> • Not used in ways that facilitate or support criminal
conduct[/indent]
>
> These responsibilities cannot be delegated or brushed aside.
Where there is evidence that a KADOE recipient has used personal
data in a manner that may constitute a criminal offence, the
DVLA must act—whether by initiating proceedings under the KADOE
contract, reporting the matter to enforcement agencies, or
revoking access to its data systems.
>
> I request that the DVLA take the following actions:
>
> [indent]• Investigate APCOA’s conduct in this case
> • Determine whether a breach of the KADOE contract and PPSCoP
has occurred
> • Refer the matter to the appropriate enforcement authority or
police, given the potential criminality under the Fraud Act
> • Suspend or terminate APCOA’s KADOE access if
warranted[/indent]
>
> The attached correspondence from APCOA constitutes direct
evidence of misrepresentation and unlawful processing. I trust
the DVLA will treat this complaint with the seriousness and
urgency that such conduct demands.
>
> Name: [INSERT YOUR NAME]
> Date: [INSERT DATE]
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 69383--------------------------------------------------
Re: APCOA - No Valid Payment - Railway Byelaws Bedford Station
DIR By: G6PRK
Date: April 30, 2025, 9:08 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Amazing - thanks.
#Post#: 69384--------------------------------------------------
Re: APCOA - No Valid Payment - Railway Byelaws Bedford Station
DIR By: b789
Date: April 30, 2025, 9:11 am
---------------------------------------------------------
And send the following to your MP:
--- Quote ---
> Subject: Urgent Update: Written Admission by APCOA Confirms
Misuse of DVLA Data and Possible Criminal Offence
>
> Dear [MP's Name],
>
> I am writing to follow up on my previous correspondence sent
on [insert date], regarding APCOA Parking (UK) Ltd and their
misuse of personal data obtained in reliance upon DVLA keeper
records. Since that time, APCOA have issued a written response
to a formal complaint which makes an admission that is nothing
short of damning.
>
> They have confirmed in writing that their so-called “Penalty
Notices”, issued under the guise of Railway Byelaws, are in fact
civil demands pursued under private contract law, not statutory
penalties. Despite this, they continue to design and issue
notices that falsely imply criminal liability, threaten
prosecution under byelaw 14, and reference statutory offences.
Payments are retained by APCOA or the landowner—not the public
purse—proving these are not lawful fines.
>
> This is not just misleading; it arguably engages criminal
liability under Section 2 of the Fraud Act 2006 – false
representation made dishonestly and with intent to cause a gain
or loss. It also raises profound concerns about the DVLA’s
ongoing role in facilitating these schemes by releasing keeper
data under the KADOE contract, with no apparent oversight or
sanction when that data is subsequently misused.
>
> The evidence now includes:
>
> [indent]• APCOA’s own written admission that the notices are
civil, not statutory.
> • The use of the term “Penalty Notice” to falsely imply
criminal liability.
> • Threats of prosecution despite no intention or legal
mechanism to prosecute.
> • Processing of personal data in a manner contrary to the
purpose under which it was obtained from the DVLA.[/indent]
>
> This is a serious matter of public interest, and I
respectfully request that you raise it directly with the
Secretary of State for Transport or the Minister responsible for
DVLA oversight. The issue is not isolated, and unless Parliament
intervenes, it will continue to affect thousands of motorists.
>
> I am happy to provide a copy of APCOA’s written admission upon
request. Please confirm that this matter will now be taken
forward.
>
> Yours sincerely,
>
> [Your Full Name]
> [Your Address + Postcode]
> [Your Contact Email]
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 70540--------------------------------------------------
Re: APCOA - No Valid Payment - Railway Byelaws Bedford Station
DIR By: G6PRK
Date: May 8, 2025, 8:30 am
---------------------------------------------------------
@b789 further update RE SAR...
--- Quote ---
> Good afternoon,
>
> Thank you for your email to the Data Protection Office at
APCOA Parking (UK).
>
> In line with GDPR, we require identification as we need to be
satisfied that we know the identity of the requester before
supplying any personal information.
>
> Within guidance provided by the Information Commissioner's
Office (ICO) under 'what to expect after making a Subject Access
request' it states "ID checks are sometimes needed to check you
are the person asking for the information and to protect your
personal information. When asked for ID, you should provide it."
>
> The GDPR legislation also states that “The controller should
use all reasonable measures to verify the identity of a data
subject who requests access, in particular in the context of
online services and online identifiers.”
>
> As advised previously, once your identity has been verified,
any identification sent is then securely deleted from our
system, the documentation is not retained.
>
> Please also be advised that the timescale for responding to a
SAR does not begin until we have received the requested
information.
>
> For more information on identity verification, please view the
ICO guidance by visiting
HTML https://ico.org.uk
.
>
> Yours sincerely,
>
> Jack Speakman
>
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 70583--------------------------------------------------
Re: APCOA - No Valid Payment - Railway Byelaws Bedford Station
DIR By: b789
Date: May 8, 2025, 1:41 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Go straight into a formal complaint to the ICO. Whilst the ICO
will expect you to have exhausted your issue with APCOA first,
you can tell them that they are deliberately obfuscating.
Point out the unacceptable delay in first responding to the SAR
after 27 days demanding ID when it is unnecessary as they have
already been in communication with you.
Any response yet from the DVLA or your MP?
#Post#: 75352--------------------------------------------------
Re: APCOA - No Valid Payment - Railway Byelaws Bedford Station
DIR By: roythebus
Date: June 8, 2025, 7:14 am
---------------------------------------------------------
A lengthy read there! I note the term "motorist" is used several
times. Who, in law, is the "motorist", the driver, the
registered keeper, a passenger in a motor vehicle?
My partner has just received a "penalty charge" from APCOA using
a mixture of Bylaw 14 and POFA, similar to one I had about 3
years ago. I challenged that and have heard nothing since. I'll
start a separate thread for that one.
*****************************************************
Page 4 of 4
DIR Previous Page