1. It will be sent by the debt collector's legal representation?
quote]
Which bit about this was not clear?You can safely ignore any useless debt recovery letter. Debt collectors are powerless to do anything except to try and persuade the low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree to pay up out of ignorance and fear. Never, ever communicate with a powerless debt collector. You can safely shred the letter from Trace and use it as hamster bedding for all anyone cares.
A debt collector is a third party and has nothing to do with the contract allegedly breached by the driver. A useless debt collector cannot do anything, least all instruct a solicitor to sue you for something that they are nothing to do with!
The contract allegedly breached is between the parking firm and the driver. ONLY the parking firm can instruct a solicitor to initiate a claim.
Do you have any understanding of how someone gets a CCJ? Nothing we advise on here will make anyone get a CCJ.QuoteA County Court Judgment (CCJ) does not just happen—it follows a clear legal process. If someone gets a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) from a private parking company, here's what happens step by step:1. Parking Charge Notice (PCN) Issued• The parking company sends a letter (Notice to Keeper) demanding money.
• This is not a fine—it’s an invoice for an alleged breach of contract.
2. Opportunity to Appeal• The recipient can appeal to the parking company.
•If rejected, they may be able to appeal to POPLA (if BPA member) or IAS (if IPC member).
• If an appeal is lost or ignored, the parking company demands payment.
3. Debt Collection Letters• The parking company might send scary letters or pass the case to a debt collector.
• Debt collectors have no power—they just send letters and can be ignored.
• No CCJ happens at this stage.
4. Letter Before Claim (LBC)• If ignored for long enough, the parking company (or their solicitor) sends a Letter Before Claim (LBC).
• This is a warning that they may start a court case.
• The recipient has 30 days to reply before a claim is filed.
• No CCJ happens at this stage.
5. County Court Claim Issued• If ignored or unpaid, the parking company may file a claim with the County Court.
• The court sends a Claim Form with details of the claim and how to respond.
• The recipient has 14 days to respond (or 28 days if they acknowledge it).
• No CCJ happens at this stage.
6. Court Process• If the recipient defends the claim, a judge decides if they owe money.
• If the recipient ignores the claim, the parking company wins by default.
• No CCJ happens yet unless the recipient loses and ignores the court.
7. Judgment & Payment• If the court rules that money is owed, the recipient has 30 days to pay in full.
• If they pay within 30 days, no CCJ goes on their credit file.
• If they don’t pay within 30 days, the CCJ stays on their credit file for 6 years.
Conclusion
CCJs do not appear out of thin air. They only happen if:• A parking company takes the case to court.
• The person loses or ignores the case.
• The person fails to pay within 30 days.
If you engage with the process (appeal, defend, or pay on time), no CCJ happens.
Unfortunately you are unable to appeal this charge. At the time that the charge was incurred, a Notice to Driver may have been affixed to the vehicle or sent through the post. This offered the driver the ability to appeal within 28 days from its imposition. You also as the registered keeper or the driver of the vehicle had the right to appeal within the 28 day period from the point of issue of the Notice to Keeper. Since we have received no further correspondence from you, payment is required within 14 days. If you consider there to be exceptional circumstances as to why you should be allowed to appeal outside of this period then you should send your reasons to us, in writing, at 2 Wellington Place, Leeds, West Yorkshire, LS1 4AP.
I am the keeper of the vehicle and I dispute your 'parking charge'. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner.
As your Notice to Keeper (NtK) does not fully comply with ALL the requirements of PoFA 2012, you are unable to hold the keeper of the vehicle liable for the charge. Partial or even substantial compliance is not sufficient. There will be no admission as to who was driving and no inference or assumptions can be drawn. PCS has relied on contract law allegations of breach against the driver only.
The registered keeper cannot be presumed or inferred to have been the driver, nor pursued under some twisted interpretation of the law of agency. Your NtK can only hold the driver liable. PCS have no hope should you ever try to litigate this, so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.
Dear Sir or Madam
Please note, messages sent to this email address will not be responded to.
Appeal: If you are trying to appeal a parking charge that has been issued to you by a parking operator that is a member of the International Parking Community (IPC), you must first appeal to the parking operator. The details of the appeals process will be detailed on the notice you will have received.
If they reject your appeal they will give you the ability to appeal to the Independent Appeals Service (IAS). Once you have been given that ability then you will only have 28 days to lodge the appeal.
Appeals can be lodged online at www.theias.org You will need the Parking charge number and the vehicle registration number.
Complaint: If you believe that a member of the IPC has breached the Sector Code of Practice, you are able to submit a complaint. You must first submit your complaint to the parking operator, the details of this process will be detailed on any notice you will have received and will be documented on their website if applicable.
Should you remain dissatisfied with their response, you may escalate your complaint to the IPC via the online portal: portal.theipc.info/login/complaints
Assistance: If you need to enquire about the process of appealing a parking charge then you can visit www.theias.org where you will find helpful information. If your enquiry is more complicated you will be able to lodge an enquiry by using the contact us tab, registering your details and sending your enquiry through the online portal. www.theias.org/contact-us
If you want to know whether you should have the opportunity to appeal a charge, please check the flowchart at www.theias.org
If you are asking about payments of a parking charge, then we are unable to assist you with this matter. You will need to contact the operator who issued the notice.
If you want to know if an operator is a member of the International Parking Community, please visit https://portal.theipc.info/aos-members
Finally, if your enquiry relates to The private parking sector single Code of Practice, this can be found by using the following link: irp.cdn-website.com/262226a6/files/uploaded/sector_single_Code_of_Practice.pdf
We hope you found this information useful
Kind Regards
Thank you for your correspondence of 13th of June about the release of information
from the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency’s (DVLA) vehicle register. I have been
asked to formally review your case at Step 1 of our complaint’s procedure.
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 Law are met. The Agency must
strike a balance between ensuring the privacy of motorists is respected while
enabling those who may have suffered loss or damage to seek redress.
The Government’s policy is that parking operators must be a member of an
Accredited Trade Association (ATA) to receive DVLA data and DVLA will not
disclose data to parking companies who are not members of an ATA and looks
primarily to the ATA’s to monitor adherence to the code of practice and explore and
address non-compliance when it arises. The ATA makes stringent checks before
parking management companies can join. If a company fails to comply with the
relevant code of practice, it can be suspended or expelled, during which time no data
will be provided to it by the DVLA.
The company in question, Parking Control Solution Ltd is a member of the
International Parking Community Ltd (IPC) which is an ATA for the parking industry.
The IPC’s code of practice is published on its website at www.theipc.info under the
heading Accredited Operators Scheme. If a member of this AOS 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 IPC’s code of practice, you may wish to contact
the IPC via their website or by writing to IPC, at PO Box 662 SK10 9NR.
We have fully considered all the information available. If you feel that your
complaint has not been resolved, you can request escalation of your complaint to
Step 2 of the complaints process. Further options about our complaint procedure
can be found online at www.gov.uk/dvla/complaints.
Should we go ahead with the complaint above?Yes - we were working on the assumption this had been done.
I am submitting a formal complaint against Parking Control Solutions Ltd (Company No. 08419177), who purport to be an IPC AOS member with DVLA KADOE access. They do not appear on the IPC’s publicly-published list of AOS members, and every enquiry to ipc@theipc.info elicits only an automated, non-responsive boilerplate.
Because they are not a current IPC-accredited operator, they have no legitimate contract with the DVLA to access keeper data. Their issuance of a PCN to me, the registered keeper, using DVLA-supplied data therefore amounts to unauthorised data access and misuse.
Furthermore, the IPC itself—acting as the Accredited Trade Association—has failed in its duty to maintain an accurate public register and to respond to reasonable requests for confirmation of membership.
Under UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018, the DVLA, as Data Controller, is obliged to investigate any misuse of keeper data and the conduct of both data recipients and the ATA that governs them. I therefore request:• A full investigation into Parking Control Solutions Ltd’s unlawful access and use of my personal data.
• An inquiry into the IPC’s failure to fulfil its ATA obligations.
• Appropriate enforcement action or sanctions against both PCS Ltd and the IPC, up to suspension or termination of KADOE access.
Please acknowledge receipt of this complaint and provide me with a reference number.
SUPPORTING STATEMENT
Complaint to DVLA – Unauthorised Access to Keeper Data & ATA Failure
Operator name: Parking Control Solutions Ltd (Company No. 08419177)
Date of PCN issue: [INSERT DATE]
Vehicle registration: [INSERT VRM]
1. Introduction
I submit this complaint to the DVLA regarding the conduct of Parking Control Solutions Ltd (“PCS Ltd”) in relation to their access and use of my personal keeper data, and the failure of the International Parking Community (“IPC”), as the Accredited Trade Association (ATA), to uphold its duties. PCS Ltd obtained my DVLA-supplied data purportedly under the Keeper At Date Of Event (KADOE) scheme, but as they are not listed on the IPC’s official AOS register, they hold no valid contract with the DVLA. This amounts to unauthorised data access. Moreover, the IPC has repeatedly refused to confirm or deny PCS Ltd’s accreditation status, responding only with automated, non-responsive boilerplate, thereby breaching its own obligations as regulator of the sector.
2. Unauthorised Access and Misuse of DVLA Data
Lack of KADOE Entitlement
PCS Ltd is absent from the IPC’s publicly-published list of Accredited Operator Scheme (AOS) members (see screenshot attached). Only AOS members may lawfully request keeper data under KADOE. By requesting—and using—my personal data without any such accreditation, PCS Ltd acted entirely outside the scope of the DVLA’s KADOE contract.
Misuse of Personal Data
PCS Ltd subsequently issued a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) to me, the registered keeper, on [INSERT DATE]. This use of my data was neither authorised (no valid KADOE contract) nor compliant with the Private Parking Single Code of Practice (PPSCoP), to which all accredited operators must adhere. Even if a KADOE request had been lawful, any misuse thereafter (misleading notices and refusal to engage) would breach the PPSCoP’s requirements for fair and transparent pursuit of charges.
3. Failure of the IPC as Accredited Trade Association
The IPC, charged by the DVLA to oversee AOS membership, has materially failed in two respects:1. Failure to Maintain an Accurate, Public Register
No current mechanism exists for verifying whether PCS Ltd holds accreditation. The publicly-accessible AOS list omits PCS Ltd, yet they continue to claim membership. This undermines public confidence and the integrity of self-regulation.
2. Refusal to Provide Substantive Responses
Every enquiry sent to ipc@theipc.info regarding PCS Ltd’s status has received only an automated, non-responsive reply. The IPC thereby denies stakeholders any transparent means of confirming accreditation, in direct contravention of its ATA duties under the PPSCoP and the DVLA’s governance framework.
4. Legal and Regulatory Framework
Under UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018, the DVLA acts as Data Controller for all personal data released under KADOE. It is incumbent upon the DVLA to:• Investigate any unauthorised or unlawful disclosures of keeper data.
• Enforce the contractual terms of the KADOE scheme, including suspension or termination of access for breaches.
• Ensure that the IPC, as ATA, properly regulates its members and maintains transparent public records.
The actions of PCS Ltd and the inaction of the IPC collectively represent a failure of the DVLA’s governance safeguards and a breach of statutory obligations.
Additionally, the IPC include the DVLA logo on their website pages, which may or may not be authorised. Evidence of this is in the screenshots attached.
5. Requested Remedies
I respectfully request that the DVLA:• Confirm that PCS Ltd held no valid KADOE contract and therefore accessed my data without authorisation.
• Investigate and sanction PCS Ltd for any misuse of my personal data and breach of the PPSCoP.
• Investigate the IPC’s compliance with its duties as ATA, and require them to maintain an accurate public register and to respond substantively to accreditation enquiries.
• Take enforcement action against both PCS Ltd and/or the IPC as necessary, up to and including suspension or termination of their KADOE access.
Please provide me with a formal acknowledgment of this complaint and a reference number for your records. I am prepared to supply any further information or documentation required to assist your investigation.
6. Attachments• Screenshot of the IPC AOS members page showing omission of PCS Ltd
• Email correspondence log demonstrating only automated IPC replies
• Copy of the PCN issued by PCS Ltd
Name: [INSERT YOUR NAME]
Date: [INSERT DATE]
Subject: AOS member query - Parking Control Solutions Ltd
Dear Sirs,
I am enquiring about a private parking operator, Private Control Solutions Ltd, company number: 08419177, that claims to be an AOS member of the IPC. However, they do not appear on your list of AOS members.
Can you please confirm whether this company is a current AOS member of the IPC and from what date they first received accreditation.
I look forward to your response.
Yours faithfully,
[Your name]
I am the keeper of the vehicle and I dispute your 'parking charge'. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner.
For your information, my name and address for service as the Registered Keeper is:
[Your name]
[Your address]
[Post code]
As your Notice to Driver (NtD) does not fully comply with ALL the requirements of PoFA 2012, you are unable to hold the Keeper of the vehicle liable for the charge. Partial or even substantial compliance is not sufficient. There will be no admission as to who was driving and no inference or assumptions can be drawn. PCS has relied on contract law allegations of breach against the driver only.
The registered keeper cannot be presumed or inferred to have been the driver, nor pursued under some twisted interpretation of the law of agency. Your NtD can only hold the driver liable. PCS have no hope at POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.
There was some intention to seek advice from the site manager to see if there would be any support to have the ticket thrown out. This was apparently not pursued.It should be pursued now - this is by far the easiest way to resolve the matter.
1. If I recall correctly, the general concept of a lower fine converting to a higher fine after a given period is a disputed mechanism amongst this community. Is there a reliable way to refuse the higher fee and pay the lower fee only, even after the deadline?That's not quite the correct way round. The charge will be £X (usually £100). As an 'incentive' to pay up without a fuss, and in accordance with the Private Parking Sector Single Code of Practice, parking companies offer a discount of at least 40% on the charge if it is paid within 14 days. Once that period has passed, the company will not entertain paying at the reduced fee. Although this is only relevant if one is intending to pay.
2. The notice having been lost, the recipient will presumably have to get in touch with the parking company first even to be able to make the payment. But this has me wondering—is there anything in the fact that no follow-up has been sent in the mail?If no payment or appeal is received, the parking company will (should) apply to the DVLA for the details of the registered keeper of the vehicle, and will then send said keeper a parking charge notice by post.