Printfriendly

Wednesday, 7 June 2017

UKCPS were banned for ghost ticketing

The Prankster previously blogged that UKCPS were temporarily suspended by the IPC. They were banned on 13 October 2016 and reinstated on 20 December 2016. The DVLA forbade them from requesting keeper data for any tickets issued during this period.

This FoI request reveals that the reason they were banned was for ghost ticketing - where a warden puts a ticket on the windscreen, photographs it, then removes it, leaving the driver unaware they have been ticketed.

Ghost ticketing increases the revenue operators get because they driver cannot pay at the reduced rate, removes their right to appeal because the IPC allows operators to set the appeal expiry date before the date when the PCN is sent by post, and prevents the driver from being able to gather photographic and other evidence that no contravention occurred.

The motorist was issued with 23 tickets. He made an initial appeal on one ticket to UKCPS, which was not upheld. He then gathered evidence and sent a complaint to the IPC with video evidence showing that on at least 3 occasions ghost tickets were issued.

Eventually all 23 tickets were cancelled by UKCPS.

UKCPS also cancelled all outstanding tickets issued by the warden, but did not refund tickets which had already been paid.

Here is what the IPC had to say about Ghost Ticketing in their January 2016 newsletter following a consultation with operators.


UKCPS told the DVLA that they had never previously had a complaint that their wardens had ghost ticketed.

Any further issues reported to the DVLA will result in a ban of 6 months.

Happy Parking

The Parking Prankster



3 comments:

  1. Maybe the IPC should have The Fortean Times investigate.

    ReplyDelete
  2. When they were re-instated surely they would have simply applied for the data they were earlier denied??

    And then chased the RK, even though they would probably have been out of time??

    ReplyDelete
  3. All the DVLA bans I've ever seen have stipulated that they cannot retrospectively apply for keeper details. I imagine this is no different.

    ReplyDelete