Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • jack123456
    • By jack123456 17th May 17, 10:38 AM
    • 50Posts
    • 36Thanks
    jack123456
    ****Help with POPLA appeal****
    • #1
    • 17th May 17, 10:38 AM
    ****Help with POPLA appeal**** 17th May 17 at 10:38 AM
    Hi,


    I have had a PCN from Parking Eye, I have lodged an appeal and been unsuccessful, I gave no admission to who the driver was and used a template on another thread. I have a POPLA number and was hoping for some help please.


    I moved address so received the NTK two month after the event, as my address on the vehicle had not been changed by this point. So far, for my POPLA appeal I am going to state there is no admission to the driver and being the registered keeper, I am also going to state that there is little signage to confirm that they have ANPR in use as I have read that this is a reasonable ground for appeal.


    Any help would be appreciated!
Page 4
    • jack123456
    • By jack123456 27th Jun 17, 2:55 PM
    • 50 Posts
    • 36 Thanks
    jack123456
    Great to see you taking a proactive and assertive stance by hitting key players in all of this. How about your MP, because he/she should be really interested in the response you get from the NHS?

    It's a pity you didn't append to the NHS letters 'cc Hon Joe Bloggs MP' which would likely make them think twice if they were thinking of offloading you with a fob-off.
    Originally posted by Umkomaas

    I really wished I would have done that now you've said it, one of those simple things that I've missed off. I will follow on with an e-mail to my Local MP and an MP for Sunderland also. I will also be contacting local press, to see if they are interested in the story.
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 27th Jun 17, 3:48 PM
    • 15,571 Posts
    • 24,311 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    I really wished I would have done that now you've said it, one of those simple things that I've missed off. I will follow on with an e-mail to my Local MP and an MP for Sunderland also. I will also be contacting local press, to see if they are interested in the story.
    Originally posted by jack123456
    Good stuff.
    We cannot provide you with a silver bullet to get you out of this. You have to be in for the long run, and need to involve yourself in research and work for you to get rid of this. It is not simple. We will help, but can't do it for you.

    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 28th Jun 17, 9:40 PM
    • 51,575 Posts
    • 65,193 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Really pleased to see your complaint in this case.

    It does seem that ParkingEye may have (allegedly, let's see your explanation, PE) falsified/concocted data to create a PCN, when the date of the ANPR photos doesn't match the date from the P&D machine.

    This needs exposing.

    It is potentially every bit as bad as the UKPC doctoring of photos if it has occurred as suggested. Someone has created/signed off that PCN, it can't have been generated automatically by some automated process, if the ANPR photos didn't exist on the same date as the flawed P&D system data.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • jack123456
    • By jack123456 29th Jun 17, 1:44 PM
    • 50 Posts
    • 36 Thanks
    jack123456
    I have had a reply about this from NHS England, they have directed me to Sunderland Royal to send the complaint to. NHS Trust Tyne and Wear have done the same also. They have stated that this has to be dealt with by the individual trust. I'm still waiting to hear back from PE and the DVLA.
    • jack123456
    • By jack123456 30th Jun 17, 11:36 AM
    • 50 Posts
    • 36 Thanks
    jack123456
    I have had a reply from PE, they have had this to say


    30 June 2017
    Reference: Parking Charge Notice - 022450/479698
    Dear Sir / Madam,
    We write further to your recent correspondence, which was received in relation to the
    Parking Charge incurred on 23 February 2017 at 15:31, at Sunderland Royal Hospital -
    Arterial Road car park.
    We can confirm that your letter has now been reviewed, however, we must inform you
    that your request for compensation is rejected. It is our position that there is no basis for
    such a payment to be made by ParkingEye.
    Yours faithfully,
    ParkingEye Legal Department
    ParkingEye Ltd
    • jack123456
    • By jack123456 30th Jun 17, 11:41 AM
    • 50 Posts
    • 36 Thanks
    jack123456
    I have had a reply from PE, they have had this to say


    30 June 2017
    Reference: Parking Charge Notice - 022450/479698
    Dear Sir / Madam,
    We write further to your recent correspondence, which was received in relation to the
    Parking Charge incurred on 23 February 2017 at 15:31, at Sunderland Royal Hospital -
    Arterial Road car park.
    We can confirm that your letter has now been reviewed, however, we must inform you
    that your request for compensation is rejected. It is our position that there is no basis for
    such a payment to be made by ParkingEye.
    Yours faithfully,
    ParkingEye Legal Department
    ParkingEye Ltd
    Originally posted by jack123456

    I also got this e-mail from Sunderland Royal


    Dear Mr ....

    Thank you for your further email. I have forwarded this onto Claire Dodds and requested that she contacts you to discuss.

    Regards
    Jade

    Supporting the campaign:
    <img width="184" height="55" class="yiv9778665902ycb7966373712" id="yiv9778665902_x0000_i1026">
    Jade .... | Help and Advice Service Assistant | City Hospitals Sunderland
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 1st Jul 17, 12:41 AM
    • 51,575 Posts
    • 65,193 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    I have had a reply from PE, they have had this to say


    30 June 2017
    Reference: Parking Charge Notice - 022450/479698
    Dear Sir / Madam,
    We write further to your recent correspondence, which was received in relation to the
    Parking Charge incurred on 23 February 2017 at 15:31, at Sunderland Royal Hospital -
    Arterial Road car park.
    We can confirm that your letter has now been reviewed, however, we must inform you
    that your request for compensation is rejected. It is our position that there is no basis for
    such a payment to be made by ParkingEye.
    Yours faithfully,
    ParkingEye Legal Department
    ParkingEye Ltd
    Originally posted by jack123456



    cc: david.dunford@dvla.gsi.gov.uk

    cc: steve.c@britishparking.co.uk

    cc: Claire Dodds, Sunderland Royal Hospital



    Dear ParkingEye,

    re: Formal complaint regarding ParkingEye Ltd's misuse of data, and false dates, in PCN xxxxxx/xxxxxx

    I am pleased to see you have reviewed the complaint. In that case, assuming your review was sufficiently thorough, you must have uncovered that the images used in your so-called 'PCN' were from 31st January.

    To reiterate - there was no parking event, no visit at all, on 23 February 2017. The car was not there then, and it seems to me that ParkingEye has concocted a PCN from a 31st January image, and generated the imaginary February date from your faulty PDT system. This occurred despite ParkingEye's supposed '19 checks' by your staff that apparently take place before any PCN is issued, and cannot be blamed on a mere system error or oversight, because the PCN was a hybrid using two conflicting data records.

    Due to the KADOE rules and the BPA Code of Practice, as well as your ICO registration, ParkingEye are undoubtedly the data controller in this matter and this entire episode is indisputably in breach of various data principles, the remedy for which is compensation to be paid to the wronged data subject. I suggest this complaint is escalated to your Legal Department, since ParkingEye cannot deflect this valid claim simply by saying ''your request for compensation is rejected. It is our position that there is no basis for such a payment to be made by ParkingEye''.

    I beg to differ, and I am simply not going to go away. This matter has caused significant distress to me and my family.

    I would like to draw your attention to a judgment last week at the Leeds County Court, 3SP00071 - Blamires v LGO. This was a claim for damages including a matter of a significant breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA). Of particular relevance was the award of £2,500 for distress arising from failure to prepare and keep accurate data records. As is now relatively well known, the DPA’s original drafting precluded compensation for distress alone, but the Court of Appeal, in Vidal Hall & ors v Google [2015] EWCA Civ 311, held that this was contrary to the provisions of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and that, accordingly, there was a right under the DPA to claim compensation for “pure” distress. The award in Blamires v LGO was of “Vidal Hall” compensation, with the judge saying there was ''no doubt in my mind that the data breaches have caused distress to the claimant in their own rights as well as as a result of the consequences that flowed.''

    The judge awarded a further £2,500 aggravated damages because of the manner in which the Defendant conducted its case, including the fact that, notwithstanding being told by the Claimant that its conduct/data was wrong, it took nearly two years for the Defendant to admit the mistake.

    I expect ParkingEye to admit its mistake.

    I require a full and frank explanation, as I am sure, does the NHS Trust, and I reserve my rights regarding this distressing matter. I urge ParkingEye to treat this issue with the seriousness it deserves, not least because you are already acting outwith the will of Parliament by operating a 'PCN income only' (very obviously incentivised) parking regime at an NHS location, where your victims are likely to be vulnerable. I expect ParkingEye to urgently discuss and explain this failure of your systems and data control with the BPA, the DVLA and the NHS Trust, and in fairness to all patients affected, identify all other such cases.

    It goes without saying that the matter will require the NHS Trust, and its agent ParkingEye, to report the failure of its data control to the Information Commissioner.

    I look forward to receiving a more thorough response, and this time, kindly offer me the courtesy of using my name in your salutation. I look forward to ParkingEye's offer of settlement within 21 days.

    yours faithfully,
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 01-07-2017 at 1:36 AM.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • jack123456
    • By jack123456 1st Jul 17, 12:56 AM
    • 50 Posts
    • 36 Thanks
    jack123456
    That's brilliant! I'll be posting that off to them on Monday! It's just the fact they didn't even refer to me by my name, just 'dear sir/madam'.

    Hopefully Sunderland Royal will take things a bit more seriously!

    Thank you 😊
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 1st Jul 17, 1:18 AM
    • 51,575 Posts
    • 65,193 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    I've edited some more in, compensation for you is calling...

    Oh, and NEVER post to ParkingEye. Email:

    enforcement@parkingeye.co.uk

    and copy in the people I have written 'cc' to (not blind copies) so that PE can see you have copied them all in...
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 01-07-2017 at 1:25 AM.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • jack123456
    • By jack123456 1st Jul 17, 9:44 AM
    • 50 Posts
    • 36 Thanks
    jack123456
    I'll get straight to that! Thank you so much.

    It felt like such a standard reply from them, thinking I would just go away and leave them alone. I'm glad you gave me their e-mail address I didn't trust I would even get a response writing to them. I'll keep you all updated!
    • jack123456
    • By jack123456 4th Jul 17, 1:05 PM
    • 50 Posts
    • 36 Thanks
    jack123456
    Just sent the response to them now (had a hectic few days). Here's to hoping for a good response!
    • jack123456
    • By jack123456 4th Jul 17, 5:43 PM
    • 50 Posts
    • 36 Thanks
    jack123456
    BPA-11599

    Dear Mr ......,

    Thank you for email. Your email has been passed to Investigations Team to review.

    We will contact ParkingEye Limited for further information and will be back in touch once we have received a response.

    Yours Sincerely,

    Esme Berry
    AOS Investigations Team
    British Parking Association
    Email: aos@britishparking.co.uk
    Web: www.britishparking.co.uk
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 5th Jul 17, 1:38 AM
    • 51,575 Posts
    • 65,193 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Oooh, that's a step further than the usual BPA shameful fob-off from Thomas B.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • jack123456
    • By jack123456 7th Jul 17, 5:33 PM
    • 50 Posts
    • 36 Thanks
    jack123456
    BPA-11599

    Dear Mr ......

    Thanks for your patience while we have considered your case.

    On receipt of your letter of ParkingEye Ltd's misuse of data, we made contact with ParkingEye Ltd for comment.

    We have received the response below from ParkingEye Ltd.

    I can confirm Mr xxxxx vehicle was captured by our ANPR cameras entering the Arterial Road at Sunderland Royal Hospital on 23rd February 2017 at 14:05pm, and exiting that afternoon at 15:31pm; remaining onsite for 1 hour 25 minutes. We have conducted a technical review of the case and can find no evidence to suggest that the Parking Charge has been issued incorrectly.

    Indeed, we note that a tariff payment of £2.00 was made for the vehicle with registration Xxxxxxxx (Mr Xxxxx vehicle) at 14:09pm on 23rd February 2017, which was sufficient for 1 hour of parking. More significantly, the tariff payment made on the date in question strongly suggests that Mr Xxxxx vehicle was indeed onsite and parked in breach of the terms and conditions.

    Therefore, we cannot agree that there has been a breach of the Data Protection Act 1998. However, if Mr Xxxxx would like to provide us with any evidence to support his assertions, then we are happy to review further.

    You will appreciate that our remit extends only to those items set out within our Approved Operator Scheme Code of Practice and whether ParkingEye Ltd have breached any of these.

    In considering the evidence supplied by both parties we have reached the following conclusions;

    There is no compelling evidence to suggest a breach of the BPA Code.

    It is not within our remit to make an assessment of whether there has been a breach of the Data Protection Act in this case, and we will not attempt to do so.

    That this matter lies between you and Parking Eye.

    Consequently we have closed the file on this matter.

    Yours Sincerely,

    Esme Berry
    Last edited by jack123456; 08-07-2017 at 8:35 AM.
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 7th Jul 17, 7:20 PM
    • 15,571 Posts
    • 24,311 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    @OP - What do you think of that response? PE seem quite categoric. Can they possibly be correct, or is there some more to consider?
    We cannot provide you with a silver bullet to get you out of this. You have to be in for the long run, and need to involve yourself in research and work for you to get rid of this. It is not simple. We will help, but can't do it for you.

    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
    • jack123456
    • By jack123456 7th Jul 17, 9:58 PM
    • 50 Posts
    • 36 Thanks
    jack123456
    I definitely wasn't at the hospital on that date, for them to send a PCN then go back on themselves and state that there was sufficient money paid. The money paid £2 was by the driver on 31/1/17
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 7th Jul 17, 10:22 PM
    • 15,571 Posts
    • 24,311 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    I definitely wasn't at the hospital on that date, for them to send a PCN then go back on themselves and state that there was sufficient money paid. The money paid £2 was by the driver on 31/1/17
    Originally posted by jack123456
    Excuse if I'm not quite understanding this. Are you saying (despite whatever date of the parking event), a £2 payment was more than sufficient to cover the actual time in site?

    PE are saying that £2 only purchased 1 hour of parking time, but they are stating the vehicle was in site for 1 hour 25 minutes (1 hour 21 minutes from the insertion of the payment to the machine) and the reason why they issued the PCN.

    I'm trying to understand this because I'm 100% on your side and trying to work out a strategy for any next move for you.

    Do you have any photos of the on-site parking signage?
    We cannot provide you with a silver bullet to get you out of this. You have to be in for the long run, and need to involve yourself in research and work for you to get rid of this. It is not simple. We will help, but can't do it for you.

    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
    • jack123456
    • By jack123456 7th Jul 17, 10:28 PM
    • 50 Posts
    • 36 Thanks
    jack123456
    There was £2 paid on the 31st Jan, but was there for a matter of 30-45 minutes. I have a photo from the 31st Jan of the payment machine in which malfunctioned.

    Surely though, if PE had found this in their review, they would have contested my POPLA? I'm getting confused with the rubbish they're coming out with.
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 7th Jul 17, 10:38 PM
    • 15,571 Posts
    • 24,311 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    So we're back to principally whether the vehicle was on-site on 23/2/17, the amount paid is a bit of a distraction.

    Can you track your (and more importantly) the car's whereabouts on that day? Dash cam or smartphone tracking of movement (although more difficult to attach a direct link to the car) or witness(es)?
    We cannot provide you with a silver bullet to get you out of this. You have to be in for the long run, and need to involve yourself in research and work for you to get rid of this. It is not simple. We will help, but can't do it for you.

    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
    • jack123456
    • By jack123456 8th Jul 17, 12:36 AM
    • 50 Posts
    • 36 Thanks
    jack123456
    Our dashcam hasn't been in use for a while as it isn't working, my phones gps would track my route, but it doesn't pin it to the car. No real witnesses as I don't car share when I take the car in to work. I don't get a parking ticket or anything as I park up the road on residential street parking.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

3,018Posts Today

7,369Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • Have a lovely weekend folks

  • Interesting, most people say they would champion a policy from a party they usually oppose. Yet is anyone brave eno? https://t.co/MWYGHunAqu

  • RT @MSE_Deals: The MSE deals team are in the office nice and early to bring you full analysis of all the #BlackFriday deals throughout the?

  • Follow Martin