DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 68467--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPS PCN for leased car at Wing Yip Cricklewood London
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: April 24, 2025, 10:38 am
---------------------------------------------------------
IMO.....
Why this desire to keep touching on peripheral matters, in this
case SEAT's misunderstanding of UKPS's status? Frankly OP, this
is not central to the issue.
I gave you a simpler suggested response to SEAT some posts ago.
Again, I suggest you stick to simplicity and the issue at hand
i.e. what docs did they provide to UKPS?
It seems clear from SEAT's response that none of the mandatory
docs was provided. Therefore IMO you approach is now:
1. Ascertain from SEAT what docs were provided and when;
2. Assuming that the mandatory docs were not among these, then
you appeal to IAS using SEAT's response;
3. When your appeal is allowed THEN you write the sort of
letters which have been suggested. But win first. If you opt out
of the appeals process then you're prolonging the issue until
court finally beckons. Do you really want this?
Some thoughts.
#Post#: 68469--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPS PCN for leased car at Wing Yip Cricklewood London
DIR By: b789
Date: April 24, 2025, 10:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Take into consideration that an IAS appeal has less than a 4%
chance of being successful. It's your time and effort.
Just to prove a point... this is how the IPC advertise the IAS
to prospective AoS members:
HTML https://i.imgur.com/qWBSY2x.jpeg
#Post#: 68496--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPS PCN for leased car at Wing Yip Cricklewood London
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: April 24, 2025, 12:48 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Each turns on its own facts and depends on the quality and
grounds of the 'appeal'.
OP, find out from SEAT what was sent.
Don't assume, ask.
Don't lecture, just ask.
Don't harangue, just ask.
#Post#: 68599--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPS PCN for leased car at Wing Yip Cricklewood London
DIR By: dfwtolhr
Date: April 25, 2025, 6:18 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Response from
DVLA
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 68612--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPS PCN for leased car at Wing Yip Cricklewood London
DIR By: b789
Date: April 25, 2025, 7:53 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Does the email you received with the appeal rejection show or
indicate that there were any attachments to it? If it can be
used as evidence of the lying behaviour of UKPS, then it should
be sent as additional evidence to a Step 2 complaint to the
DVLA. Don't send the Step 2 complaint if you can show that the
email you received shows or failed to show that there were any
attachments, as I would have to amend the wording slightly.
To send the Step 2 complaint, you go through the same steps as
for there initial complaint except that the web address is:
HTML https://contact.dvla.gov.uk/head-of-complaints
--- Quote ---
> Subject: Step 2 Escalation – Misuse of Personal Data and
Deliberate Misrepresentation by UK Parking Solutions Ltd (UKPS)
>
> Dear DVLA Head of Complaints,
>
> I am writing to escalate my complaint regarding the misuse of
my personal data by UK Parking Solutions Ltd (UKPS) to Step 2 of
your complaints process.
>
> This matter concerns not just technical breaches, but
deliberate misrepresentation by a DVLA-approved KADOE user,
acting in direct violation of the BPA/IPC Private Parking Single
Code of Practice (PPSCoP) and the terms of the KADOE contract.
>
> Background
>
> As clarified in your Step 1 response, my data was not released
to UKPS by the DVLA directly, but was passed to them via a
Transfer of Liability by the vehicle’s registered keeper,
Volkswagen Financial Services UK Ltd.
>
> However, UKPS is a KADOE account holder, and the conditions of
use attached to KADOE data access apply regardless of how the
data was obtained. The purpose of the KADOE contract is to
ensure that AOS members process personal data lawfully,
proportionately, and in full compliance with the PPSCoP —
including when pursuing charges via hirer liability under
Schedule 4 to the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA).
>
> Substance of the Complaint – Deliberate False Representation
>
> UKPS issued a Notice to Hirer (NtH) which falsely states that
it encloses all four documents required under Paragraph 13(2) of
PoFA. In reality, none of these documents were enclosed. This
was not an accidental omission — the covering page explicitly
asserts that the documents are included, which makes this a
deliberate misrepresentation.
>
> This was not an isolated incident. UKPS has now repeated the
false claim in their written response to my appeal. They stated
that the Transfer of Liability was “attached,” when in fact
nothing was enclosed. This is consistent with the earlier Notice
to Hirer, which similarly claimed that four PoFA-mandated
documents were included — when they were not. The repeated
nature of these omissions, accompanied by false assertions that
the documents were provided, demonstrates deliberate
misrepresentation and unlawful data processing, not
administrative error. This is a clear abuse of DVLA-sourced
personal data, and one that warrants regulatory action.
>
> The effect of this is that UKPS is:
>
> [indent]• Asserting that the statutory requirements of PoFA
have been met (when they haven’t);
> • Knowingly processing personal data on a false legal basis;
> • Misleading the recipient about their liability in order to
extract payment.[/indent]
>
> This goes far beyond mere sloppiness. It is a calculated and
mendacious act designed to fabricate the appearance of PoFA
compliance and shift liability unlawfully.
>
> If the DVLA accepts such conduct at face value, then it is
allowing the integrity of the vehicle register to be undermined
by rogue operators. The PPSCoP and KADOE contract become
meaningless if operators can simply lie about their compliance
and continue to access and process personal data without
oversight or consequence.
>
> Recommendation
>
> Perhaps it is time the DVLA stops assuming that operators are
acting in good faith and starts investigating whether they are,
in fact, lying. I strongly suggest that the DVLA conduct a sting
operation — for example, by hiring a vehicle and deliberately
breaching a term in a car park operated by UKPS. The resulting
NtH is likely to contain the same false assertion that the
required documents are enclosed, when in reality they will not
be. This would serve as hard proof that the breach is systemic
and deliberate, not accidental.
>
> Request
>
> I am therefore asking the DVLA to:
>
> [indent]• Investigate whether UKPS’s actions amount to a
breach of the KADOE contract and PPSCoP;
> • Determine whether the deliberate false assertion of PoFA
compliance invalidates the legal basis for processing my
personal data;
> • Consider enforcement action including suspension or
termination of KADOE access if breaches are established;
> • Acknowledge that “self-certification” by operators is wholly
inadequate when clear evidence exists of falsified statutory
compliance.[/indent]
>
> Please confirm receipt of this escalation and provide a Step 2
complaint reference. I am happy to provide copies of the NtH and
supporting evidence again if required.
>
> Yours faithfully,
>
> [Your Full Name]
> [Original DVLA Complaint Date / Reference Number]
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 68912--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPS PCN for leased car at Wing Yip Cricklewood London
DIR By: dfwtolhr
Date: April 27, 2025, 10:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Received this in the post from UKPS the other day.
So the email didn’t have any attachment but the postal response
did…
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 68914--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPS PCN for leased car at Wing Yip Cricklewood London
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: April 27, 2025, 10:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
OP, with respect we know this.
As far as can be seen, the sum total of VWFS's response was the
email which makes NO reference to attached docs, therefore they
couldn't have been provided.
But if you ASK them, they'll tell you.
Seems pretty straightforward to me. Any appeal to IAS is given
the best chance when you have the BEST evidence and not
assertions. Don't be put off by other people's experiences: your
case, your facts.
This is a matter of LAW and I can't see why we're dodging it.
#Post#: 68923--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPS PCN for leased car at Wing Yip Cricklewood London
DIR By: b789
Date: April 27, 2025, 1:29 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
There are copies of four documents required to be PoFA compliant
that UKPS should have included with their NtK.
[indent](a) a statement signed by or on behalf of the
vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the
vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement;
(b) a copy of the hire agreement;
(c) a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under
that hire agreement; and
(d) a copy of the NtK that was sent to the Keeper.[/indent]
All we have see is (a). Did you receive copies of b), (c) and
(d)? Of course you didn't. Therefore, the operator has not
complied with all the requirements of PoFA to be able to
transfer liability from the unknown (to them) driver to you, the
known Hirer.
#Post#: 68938--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPS PCN for leased car at Wing Yip Cricklewood London
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: April 27, 2025, 3:19 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The best way to prove that you didn't receive these documents is
to prove that they weren't in the creditor's possession...to do
which you get a statement from VWFS.... by writing and asking
them.
#Post#: 69476--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPS PCN for leased car at Wing Yip Cricklewood London
DIR By: dfwtolhr
Date: April 30, 2025, 5:05 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Response from SEAT:
--- Quote ---
> Thank you for contacting Seat Financial Services.
>
> A complaint has been opened for your concerns to be
investigated, and a formal full and final response sent to you
at the end of the investigation. You will receive an
acknowledgement in the next 3-5 days, and your case handler will
have up to 8 weeks for the investigation.
>
> Your complaint reference number is FLE-747262.
>
> Can you confirm the best correspondence method for if we
should contact you, whether that should be telephone, email or
letter please. Following this can you confirm the best way to
send you a full and final response whether that be letter or
email please.
>
> Please confirm you are happy for us to contact you via this
email address without further verification?
>
> Should you have any further questions, please feel free to
contact us.
>
> You can also find lots of information on our website at
myseatfinance.vwfs.co.uk or please call our customer services
team on 0330 100 8913 between 9AM – 6PM from Monday to Friday
and 9AM – 1PM on Saturday.
>
> Kind Regards
> Lauren Spurway
--- End Quote ---
*****************************************************
Page 3 of 5
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page