Help! Ukpc have 'photographic evidence' which isn't real

enfield_freddy

so UKPC have accepted that there were some rogue wardens and that the equipment they were using was "flawed" and will be re written.


quote:


The Sunday Times has today reported that the wardens responsible for doctoring photographs are no longer working for UK Parking Control. The company have also updated their software to close the loophole

dated 6/9/2015



due to this statement , it seems that faulty equipment has been sorted out.


however before this date they knew of a major fault


I suggest that EVERY person that has received a ticket prior to 6/9/15, and photographic evidence using this system rebukes it , and hands printouts of the press/PP reports to the judge , and ask him if he is happy to continue , knowing that faulty equipment was used.


the printout from the Times , might just swing it.

Umkomaas

hands printouts of the press/PP reports to the judge , and ask him if he is happy to continue , knowing that faulty equipment was used.

UKPC very rarely do court. Hopefully they will have one this year!

enfield_freddy

how true , so the above info or suggestion should be aimed at the POPLa system , when the new mob move it, this might be there first test of impartiality.


however I think when the Bevis case is resolved , they are going to be rushed off there feet (or not?) with all the cases that are stayed

nigelbb

bazster wrote: »

Indeed, anyone who can write an app this sophisticated could get the timestamp from a reliable source on the internet instead of relying on the 'phones (easily altered) time - unless, of course, they wanted the timestamp to be easily alterable.

The photo could be timestamped with date, time & location all obtained from GPS if they really wanted prevent fraud

enfield_freddy

or they could allow you to enter the car park , collect a ticket/token , and pay the correct time when you left the site.


however they would then not make any money

nigelbb

enfield_freddy wrote: »

or they could allow you to enter the car park , collect a ticket/token , and pay the correct time when you left the site.

Which is exactly what happens in the overwhelming majority of multi-storey car parks.

g0wfv

OK, so with my geeky hat on, and in all seriousness, here's my proposal ...

Given that *most* smartphone technology these days includes a GPS, any app is be designed to pull the current time from the GPS with no ability to offset for local time (all times to be in UTC straight from a read of the GPS)

Any photo produced to be used as evidence must include this date and time PLUS a stamp stating the current status of the GPS (locked to current time or not) PLUS a stamp stating the app name and version number.

Anything other than locked to GPS is to be deemed suspect.

The BPA (or other relevant AOS) should maintain a list of apps and versions of each app that will be accepted as valid evidence.

I can't see any way of fiddling that, short of spoofing GPS, which isn't that easy!

Discuss ...

ManxRed

If it can't be fiddled then the PPCs won't be interested...

fisherjim

Of course we only have UKPC's word that these rogue employees no longer work for them, and we know how honest and truthful they seem to be!

g0wfv

ManxRed wrote: »

If it can't be fiddled then the PPCs won't be interested...

In which case the BPA/IPC make it a mandatory clause in their code of practice. If they are unwilling to do this, maybe the DVLA should mandate (or be made to mandate) it as a prerequisite for approval on their list of AOSs

I realise my suggestion is all pie in the sky but as this farce has highlighted, cowboys will be cowboys until they can't get away with it.

As I am sure you agree, this 'business sector' is still woefully in need of further regulation. Until someone with the authority to make changes is willing to stick their head above the parapet.

The reason I say "be made to" above is that I see the fact that the DVLA charge a fee each time a keeper's details is requested as a conflict of interest, as this is a source of income to them. If requests for details wane, so does the cash, so maybe they need to be made to make changes by someone else with more authority?

As I say, pie in the sky - in the real world, who's going to do that?