Best Way To Challenge Incorrect ANPR Data

ian3667

Hi all,

As the RK, I received a PCN through the post yesterday from Athena ANPR Ltd for a supposed over stay at my local Lidl. According to the ANPR info the vehicle entered the car park at 14:00:15 on 16/10/2015 and left at 18:35:48 on the same day meaning that the free parking limit of 90 minutes was exceeded.

Having spent an informative couple of hours this morning on the board (many thanks to all the contributors especially for the stickies). I have a couple of queries that hopefully someone can help me with.

Whilst I was initially hopeful of a quick rejection and then on to POPLA I soon realised that as the BPA had terminated Athena's membership, I was stuck with the IPC's 'independent' appeals service

Unlike the majority of the cases I've seen in the forum, the driver(s) did not spend 4 hours 35 minutes in the car park and in fact the car was in the charge of one driver at 14:00 and a second different driver at 18:35 meaning that they have appeared to use a 'first in last out' approach on issuing the notice.

I intend to appeal the notice to with Athena and stick a strongly worded letter of complaint into Lidl customer services/CEO as I am a regular weekly shopper there and can provide evidence of that including a purchase on the day of the 'offence'.

However I'm not sure that if I don't get anywhere with that approach that I would be entirely comfortable with not appealing a rejection with IAS and waiting to be taken to court (I live in a fairly risk averse household). Whilst I can see lots of positive stories of individual's winning at POPLA, it's less clear about the success rate through ISA and post that, court. What are peoples general feelings about the likelihood of success if I do let it get all the way to a court hearing?

My second question is, what are my rights in seeking evidence from Athena to confirm my assertion that there were two visits to that car park by that vehicle with different drivers on each occasion.

In cctv terms, I would normally stick in a data subject access request for footage but this would involve me supplying the data controller with the personal details of the two drivers as I would not be allowed to access personal information held on a third party. However I do not wish to provide Athena with driver details for obvious reasons.

Thanks in advance for your help :T

System

This is called a "double dip" and a well known fault in the system. They sometimes revert to the 'no return within..' scam but that will depend on the signs.

And even if there was a 'no return within..' on the signs, there was no breach of the rules as there are 2 contracts. Each driver has their own.

Put it to Athena and see if they reject. If they do the go to the IAS - for amusement - to see how they can spin this one.

Appeal as the Registered Keeper as there is no need to name the driver - whatever they say.

At the same time go back to Lidl and ask them to cancel in return for a promise to shop there this Xmas if they are nice.

Guys_Dad

You can ask them to double check if you provide them with the approximate times the in-outs occurred. Asking them to double check equals asking them to write off the income, of course.

Have you got the photos? do they by any chance show the drivers' faces in both cases?

If not, can you prove that you were elsewhere when the car was away from the car park? If you can, then it might pay you to admit that you were the first driver and if you can get a witness statement from the second driver, then good.

In a double dip case with different drivers, then I suggest that a statement telling the absolute truth is probably best. We know that the IAS are not, how shall I put it, "motorist friendly" so the appeal to them will almost certainly be rejected, but it will show any potential court that you have tried your best to be upright and honest from the start.

ian3667

Thanks Ian and Guys Dad. I do have photos from Athena but you can't see the driver in either shot unfortunately, as one was a man and the other a woman

salmosalaris

Precisely
Play it with a dead straight bat
The chance of this getting anywhere near court is somewhere between nil and zero
I would tell Athena there were two drivers on two separate visits and invite them to cancel .
If they do not then appeal to the IAS giving details of the two visits with witness statements to back it up . I wouldn't put anything else in

ManxRed

The IAS will call you a liar unless you have absolute proof the car was elsewhere in between. Not even sure if witness statements will swing it with them.

This would be perfectly sufficient in a court case, in my opinion, but the IAS member would lose money if the appeal was upheld so they'll probably reject. The rejection will be one piece of paper they wouldn't want you to include in your defence in a court claim, so for that reason they'll probably back off from issuing a subsequent claim.

In my opinion.

salmosalaris

Who cares what the IAS come up with ?
By laying a completely honourable paper trail you will look the reasonable party in the vanishingly slim chance that a judge ever looks at it .

ManxRed

That's the point I was making.

Their rejection will improve the OP's case and worsen theirs.

ian3667

Just back from the bank with details of the transaction along with my details of average spend per month to pop into the Lidl's CS/CEO email. Also picked up photos of Athena's notices at Lidl which still shows them as being approved members of the BPA....must remember to remind Lidl that their contractor had their membership terminated by them

Starting to enjoy this

Coupon-mad

They didn't have their membership terminated. Athena were fed up we assume, so they jumped ship to move to the Trade Body with the kangaroo court, joining other like-minded greedy parking firms intent on fleecing the general public until the IAS gets sussed.

ian3667

Oh I didn't realise that, the BPA site is claiming that they terminated Athena.

"13 April 2015

BPA terminates membership of ANPR Limited

The British Parking Association (BPA) has terminated the membership of ANPR Limited with immediate effect.

Following investigations arising from complaints by motorists, BPA Officers awarded 16 Sanction Points covering multiple Code of Practice breaches including failing to follow agreed procedures in handling motorist appeals and failing to live up to BPA customer service requirements."