Parking Eye PCN Letter

Andy84Leeds

HELP!
I have today rec'd a PCN from Parking Eye.
My car is a Contract Hire so have the company I hire it from breached DPA by disclosing my details as registered keeper?
It was from Welcome Break Services near Sheffield where I had a meeting with a friend.
He was delayed due to traffic on the motorway so I ended up overstaying the 2 hour free period by over an hour and 20 minutes.
They have said the amount due is £100.00 but if paid within 14 days they wil discount to £60.00 - pretty reasonable if I'm so guilty of such an act!?
I am not accepting I was the driver nor have I made contact with them yet.
Any advice would be greatly welcomed.
Keep up the good work all.

grant_uk

Not particularly reasonable once you consider that they've served you with an unenforceable invoice.

I can't comment on the data protection question, but I can speak from personal experience that ignoring any further communications from Parking Eye is highly unlikely to end up in a court case - so highly unlikely that I'd place a hefty bet on it that would at least cover the money they want you to think you owe them.

Please look through all the threads in this sub-forum for more information, but my advice is to ignore them and once half a dozen letters come through, with the latter few mentioning solicitors and debt collectors, that should be the end of it and they'll concentrate on those who buckle and pay up.

Others will be along shortly with more information as well.

peter_the_piper

I think the hire company are allowed to give your details, did they charge for this? Most do so check your card for extras.

Andy84Leeds

Thank you for your advise so far and look forward to hearing more.

thenudeone

The hire contract will almost certainly state that they are allowed to give your details when required by law by a statutory body.

It may or may not claim to allow them to pass your details on to private companies or individuals who claim that you have entered into a contract with them.

However, a condition which effectively allows them to give your personal details to anyone who asks them could be an unfair term under UTCCR 1999 as defined here http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1999/2083/regulation/5/made. However, the statutory remedy - that the unfair term isn't binding on you - isn't helpful, because it's not the lease / hire company that's trying to enforce anything against you.

The DPA angle is interesting.

Unlike councils, who give you the right to opt out of the publicly available electoral roll when you fulfill your obligations to provide information required by law, the DVLA get away with selling your personal data to, effectively, anyone who asks for it, without your consent, and this has never been successfully challenged (AFAIK).

If you do challenge your hire / lease co., let us know how you get on.

grant_uk

Peter - sounds like a long-term lease vehicle as opposed to short-term hire, which I'd have thought would treat things differently. Just my guess though.

Andy - main thing is, don't panic and pay up. That's what the letters and the half-price for quick payment offer are designed to achieve.

Many do just that - and then find all the threads on here advising people to ignore. It's an expensive lesson for some.

The letters from private parking companies are designed to look like official fine notices you may get from the council or police, but when you look more closely at the language you can see that's not what they are. They're not allowed to call them fines or penalties, that's why they refer to Parking Charge Notices instead of Penalty Charge Notices. They are speculative invoices.

In the rarest of cases they may take someone to court, but they don't have much in the way of grounds to sue on. Loss of earnings seems to be the main one, but there aren't any for a free car park.

You may receive letters threatening court action and effects on your credit rating, but you'll notice frequent use of the word 'may'.

The only way your credit rating will be affected is if the PPC takes you to court, wins the case *and then* you still don't pay. The first two are incredibly highly unlikely to start with, so it's all just hot air.

Don't confuse debt collectors with bailiffs either. Bailiffs are appointed by the court and only get involved *after* the aforementioned non-existent court case.

Debt collectors have as much right to enter your house and seize your belongings as I do.

Andy84Leeds

I have just spoke to Mercedes Finance Admin Dept. and questioned them about passing my details to an independant 3rd Part Company (Not the police or Council) and potential DPA Breach in doing so for which they said "Sorry about that" which I said was not acceptable!
Basically she told me "we pass on your details as it's easier for us than paying them and then invoicing you".
Considering now whether I have grounds to take it up further with Mercedes?
Any suggestions folks?
Thanks.

grant_uk

It depends how far you want to take it. If they *had* paid the invoice, then they would have tried to pass that onto you. They might think that's reasonable, but as you've seen, the status of these invoices is debatable to say the least.

It would be more of a headache if they *had* paid and passed the bill to you, because you'd then be in a position of having to make the case for the unenforcability of the ticket to Mercedes. Yes, the facts are on your side, but I know I wouldn't want to have to wade through all that and then have to take it further if they decided you didn't have a case anyway.

I know there's a data protection issue, but by passing it straight to you, you are now able to ignore the letters from Parking Eye and not have to deal with another company on top of that.

It depends how much hassle you want. Ignoring Parking Eye invoices is as easy as peas and much more preferable to haggling points with a company that you have a professional relationship with.

Andy84Leeds

Thanks for all your replies - All really good.
Just to clarify my car is a Private Contract Hire (2 Years) so a bit like a lease.
Hope this helps clarify.

Sirdan

Re Data Protection I believe this is the clause they may use to justify releasing your data ,

Conditions relevant for purposes of the first principle: processing of any personal data :-
Data Protection 1998 Act Schedule 2

6(1)

"The processing is necessary for the purposes of legitimate interests pursued by the data controller or by the third party or parties to whom the data are disclosed, except where the processing is unwarranted in any particular case by reason of prejudice to the rights and freedoms or legitimate interests of the data subject."

Coupon-mad

Andy84Leeds wrote: »

Thanks for all your replies - All really good.
Just to clarify my car is a Private Contract Hire (2 Years) so a bit like a lease.
Hope this helps clarify.

The hire company HAVE done the right thing.

As per the Protection of Freedoms Act which came in 1st October, click here for the latest vehicle lease/hire industry guidelines from the BVRLA.

''Protection of Freedoms Act
The BVRLA will now be working with the British Parking Association to ensure that customers' details can be passed to private parking firms in a simple way, without the need for complex evidential requirements such as copies of rental and lease agreements.''

They have done you a favour - a million times better that than paying the fake PCN and charging you for it, & an admin fee as well!

Now you can just ignore it like we all do, and you'll get the usual letters as per the 5th thread down on this parking forum board 'PPC letter chains'. It's just a junk mail scam in spite of the official-looking bit on the 'ticket' about the new Act. Read some threads, you'll see how common the fake parking ticket scam is and most people just ignore the letters rather than appealing, which is your other option under the same Act.

Nobody on here falls for it & pays!!