Saturday, 2 August 2014

ANPR Ltd chase wrong person for parking charge

The Prankster has received information from a motorist who is being chased for a parking charge by ANPR Ltd. The motorist at one point owned a black Golf, which they traded to a garage for an orange Groove Up in February 2014. The car had a cherished number plate, which they retained. The DVLA has written to confirm the information regarding sale and plate retention was all received by them and updated on their records by 24/02/2014. They then requested permission to transfer the plates to their new car. The permission to transfer plates took a further few weeks. The letter from the DVLA was dated 10/04/2014 and the new plates were then made and fitted on 24/04/2014.

On 19/03/2014 the black Golf was detected by ANPR Ltd parking where it should not. The garage had not changed the plates and so it still had the cherished numberplate. When the ANPR operative looked up the plate the DVLA confirmed it belonged to an Orange Groove Up and not a black Golf. The black Golf was apparently untaxed. ANPR therefore phoned the police to report the mismatch, who were not interested.

ANPR took photographs of the black Golf and issued a windscreen ticket.

Here is what an orange Groove Up actually looks like.

Later on, ANPR applied for keeper details. On the form sent to the DVLA they incorrectly stated the plate was on an Orange Groove Up rather than on a black Golf. They therefore received the wrong keeper details; the original keeper rather than the garage.

They then started hounding the original keeper for the parking charge. .

The keeper phoned, then appealed, stating the Orange Groove Up was never parked there, and asked for photographs, which had been refused over the phone. It was pointed out that on the date in question the Orange Groove Up had a different number plate, because the DVLA did not approve the transfer until 10/04/2014. ANPR denied receiving the appeal, even though they signed for it as registered post, and referred to it in other letters. They therefore did not issue a POPLA code

The motorist had several phone calls with Patrick Crossley of ANPR, who was described to The Prankster as extremely rude and aggressive. The Prankster does not know whether this was true. However, ANPR record all phone calls so will easily be able to shed light on this.

The motorist contacted Merseyside Police, who asked Mr Crossley to stop harassing the motorist. ANPR report they have tried but failed to speak to the police officer involved.

Patrick Crossley then wrote to the motorist using his alter ego as a director of Expedion, stating that a court claim would be filed if the motorist did not pay. The court documents all referred to an Orange Grove Up, while the pictures supplied were of a black Golf. At this point the motorist contacted The Prankster, who also contacted ANPR to find their side of the story.

This is the current state of play.

The Prankster therefore calls on ANPR to stop pursuing the motorist, who was neither the owner, keeper or driver of the car at the time of the incident. Instead The Prankster suggests they contact the garage, who may well have offended against Section 43C of the Vehicle Excise and registration Act 1994, and may therefore be happy to pay up to avoid any embarrassment.

The Prankster considers ANPR have breached the BPA code of practice for not supplying photographs when asked and not supplying a POPLA code when the appeal was denied.

The Prankster considers ANPR Ltd have breached the DVLA KADOE contract by providing wrong details on the V888/3 form.

The Prankster considers the garage may have offended against Section 43C of the Vehicle Excise and registration Act 1994.

The Prankster considers the motorist has done nothing wrong, and has been more than patient in trying to sort this out.

Happy Parking

The Parking Prankster


  1. Counterclaim for harassment

  2. Shocking.

    ANPR knew what they were doing when they requested keeper details for a car that they did not see parked as they claim.

    They expected the keeper to roll over and pay up without question only it has now backfired on them. Lets hope these scumbags get what they deserve.

  3. If they issued a windscreen PCN on 19/03 but only received keeper details from DVLA on 19/05 then haven't they missed the window for keeper liability anyway?

  4. We can confirm that Patrick Crossley is a rude and obnoxious individual who thinks he doesn't have to deal with any motorist as they are not his "customer" and they are of no relevance to him. We have put ANPR Ltd on notice that they will be in breach of their Kadoe contact should they carry out certain actions. We will happily report ANPR Ltd each and every time and we will ensure each breach is followed up. We have also dealt firmly with Expedion Ltd for our customers who remark to us how childish the letters are.
    So Patrick Crossley of Expedion Ltd (or is it ANPR Ltd) why do you lie to motorists?, why do you make false statements?, obtain keeper data when you are not entitled to it?. Finally, as you have such disdain for the BPA why dont you just leave?

  5. I accidentally deleted some comments. Bum. Sorry, fat fingers. Please renter them if you can remember what you wrote.

  6. This comment has been removed by the author.

  7. I would invite them to issue a claim. The judge would tear them a new arsehole.

  8. Another one for the Daily Mail's campaign