Aldi - Parking Fines

Enterprise_1701C

I believe anyone can buy these details, we have had people dump cars round by our garages (private land) and looked on the DVLA site and it looked like we could get the info if we paid them X amount.

fox2319

Jane_Blackford wrote: »

I believe anyone can buy these details, we have had people dump cars round by our garages (private land) and looked on the DVLA site and it looked like we could get the info if we paid them X amount.

Not sure if private individuals can do it but companies definitely can if they have an alleged reason to know. What really annoys me is that for any other company, this would be bordering on breach of data protection but for the government, it's fair game.

When it happened to me, I raised hell about it with the shop, the company, the local paper and my MP. Still not satisfied with the DPA aspects of this but I eventually got an apology from the Aldi area manager.

23rdian

As stated previously, simply ignore these. No need to engage in dialogue.

anamenottaken

cidergirl wrote: »

yes they will send 3 letters ignore them all and you will hear no more theres a thread about it on here in parking charges

But the link in derrick's post shows Parking Eye do try the courts and don't always just write letters threatening to do so.

nicegal_2

Mk14:37 wrote: »

What have the failings of a parking /surveillance firm got to do with your impressions of Aldi?

We spoke to the manager who gave us a letter saying that we needed a receipt (we don't keep Aldi receipts unless buying a computer or similar product with guarantee) for over £30 (we very rarely pay that amount, usually doing two £20 shops per week) or a bank statement (Aldi don't take credit cards and we always pay in cash). In any case, receipts would not prove anything as the argument is that we stayed between 11.30 and 5.30 (presumably to go shopping in Leeds, the train station is minutes away).

Parking Eye supposedly issued the parking charge on May 24th (the 'infringement' occured ten days earlier) but we did not receive it until June 4th, 3 weeks after the event.

The car park is free and large signs say there is a 90 minute parking limit. We have used Aldi for many years and never stayed longer than half an hour.

Parking Eye says photographic evidence shows we entered in the morning and left in the evening. This means that their cameras must also have recorded us leaving within half an hour on both occasions. We are also concerned that we will receive another letter in 3 weeks' time as we visited Aldi on 3 occasions the day we received PE's letter.

Also the letter says as owner, keeper or driver of the vehicle my husband is responsible for complying with the conditions of parking. Obviously they cannot know who was driving, and I know they have to communicate with the driver if an offence has been committed, but as in our case we have done nothing wrong, do we need to mention this if we do write?

In many of the cases on these forums the posters have actually overstayed, but we have not done anything wrong at all. Do we acknowledge receipt of the 'invoice', asking them to check their camera footage, or should we not reply at all (which might go against us later should PE take it further)?

lucylucky

The advice in these situations is always to ignore, and file all letters.

No offence has been committed.

DCFC79

nicegal did the camera not pick up your car leaving at 12ish then coming back at 5ish

Badrick

anamenottaken wrote: »

But the link in derrick's post shows Parking Eye do try the courts and don't always just write letters threatening to do so.

The trainee solicitor took Parking Eye to court to get the ticket overturned, as the vehicle hire company had already paid his ticket.

I think he would be bound by T&C of hire to reimburse any fines related to parking, speeding etc.

Mk14:37

JackieO wrote: »

There is only ever one till open and its usually run by a dyslecic 12 year old who hasn't a clue as to what he is doing.

Love the irony here. Next time you want to use the word 'dyslexic' as a cheap insult, perhaps you should make sure you can spell it first?

:rotfl::rotfl:

nicegal_2

nicegal did the camera not pick up your car leaving at 12ish then coming back at 5ish

That's what I'm wondering, as their 'photographic evidence' should obviously show us leaving and returning it would actually prove they don't have a case, so in this particular situation, rather than ignoring their letter, should we not point out that they will have our innocence on record?