Laws for keeping CCTV?

Cmdr_Bond

Excellent news guys.

Thank you very much.

Redx

the info in that ICO pdf tells you

You will need to ensure that you have retention periods in place for the personal data which you collect and store. The retention period should be consistent with the purpose you are collecting the data for. The information should be kept for the minimum period necessary and should be deleted once it is no longer needed.

so I would say its as I said , 6 years due to MCOL , 7 years under the DPA , so between 6 and 7 years for the reasons I have given

Guys_Dad

Following your question, we really need to know why you have asked.

If you are hoping they have destroyed the ANPR file for the day in question, then that is a ICO issue.

If however you hoping that you can prove double dipping, then you may be in a catch 22. You can't demand the unredacted copy of the file - even if you could process it - as it will contain pictures of other vehicles entering and leaving the site on the day in question and that would fall foul of the ICO as it would be considered as personal data with regard to these motorists.

Cmdr_Bond

Understood.

No, I'm not hoping they've destroyed the logs, quite the contrary. And if they have destroyed the logs then that is another basil in their coffin as far as I'm concerned.

Yes, I am attempting to prove double dipping, however I'm not naive enough to expect them to send me the logs, I'm well aware of the data protection act. However, merely knowing they SHOULD exist is enough, and should it come to it, I expect POPLA could review the logs themselves.

I thank you all for your assistance, and should have a draft appeal letter for you to peruse shortly.

Redx

stick to your original HIGHVIEW thread as regards popla appeals and any future court cases , thanks

Cmdr_Bond

Something related that has just popped into my head.

Private carparks such as those at retail outlets are classed private property aren't they?

I remember once being told in no uncertain terms by a jumper up security guard that i couldn't take photo in a shopping centre because it was private property, data protection, yada yada.

If they didn't have my permission to take photos of me or items registered to me, can i also use that against them?

I'm looking for as many points as possible, although I'm sure I've already got a winning case.

beamerguy

Cmdr_Bond wrote: »

Understood.

No, I'm not hoping they've destroyed the logs, quite the contrary. And if they have destroyed the logs then that is another basil in their coffin as far as I'm concerned.

Yes, I am attempting to prove double dipping, however I'm not naive enough to expect them to send me the logs, I'm well aware of the data protection act. However, merely knowing they SHOULD exist is enough, and should it come to it, I expect POPLA could review the logs themselves.

I thank you all for your assistance, and should have a draft appeal letter for you to peruse shortly.

Read the prankster blog of March this year.
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/03/parkingeye-lose-in-court-accuse-drivers.html

Logs were provided using SAR subject access.
It would be up to the PPC to ensure they are not showing the info of other drivers.

They can either provide it you or to a court

Cmdr_Bond

Redx wrote: »

stick to your original HIGHVIEW thread as regards popla appeals and any future court cases , thanks

My apologies for littering the forum.

I didn't bring highview into this post, someone else did.

While it is related to my appeal, i thought this point merited separate discussion as it could be oh use to others.

I'll crawl back to my little hole.

beamerguy

Cmdr_Bond wrote: »

Something related that has just popped into my head.

Private carparks such as those at retail outlets are classed private property aren't they?

I remember once being told in no uncertain terms by a jumper up security guard that i couldn't take photo in a shopping centre because it was private property, data protection, yada yada.

If they didn't have my permission to take photos of me or items registered to me, can i also use that against them?

I'm looking for as many points as possible, although I'm sure I've already got a winning case.

Guess the security guy was on the booze or well above his station. There would need to be signs stating NO PHOTOGRAPHS ALLOWED ON THIS SITE.

With car park signs they must state they use ANPR. Permission from the owner of the site must allow them this practice. The council needs to approve them

Cmdr_Bond

beamerguy wrote: »

Guess the security guy was on the booze or well above his station. There would need to be signs stating NO PHOTOGRAPHS ALLOWED ON THIS SITE.

With car park signs they must state they use ANPR. Permission from the owner of the site must allow them this practice. The council needs to approve them

Thank you.