PCN for Tower Road, Newquay

LeedsMat

Here's the link to the email:

hxxp://i64.tinypic.com/2620bo7.jpg

Umkomaas

http://i64.tinypic.com/2620bo7.jpg

Had slipped on to page 2 of the forum.

Coupon-mad

That's pretty useful in a couple of ways, for defences in particular, where a PCN was served late. And cases which were pre-POFA or are using pre-POFA rules/driver liability only.

Annoying that the DVLA has scampered to cover themselves that they cannot restrict release of data and that they reckon there 'was reasonable cause'. How do they know?! The thing is, there wasn't because PE wrongly claimed keeper liability applied. Firms were banned for 3 months for saying that in 2012.

LeedsMat

CM, sorry to sound a bit thick, could you explain how it might help defences? All I see is it confirming that PPCs can get keeper data whenever they feel like it without any repercussions.

Annoying that the DVLA has scampered to cover themselves that they cannot restrict release of data and that they reckon there 'was reasonable cause'.

Yep, and they've trotted out the "unable to comment" platitude twice now. Why are they unable to comment? Because they haven't looked at the evidence? Because they don't understand the evidence? Because they simply don't care as long as they get their £2.50? I suspect the latter.

Coupon-mad

It helps defences that are against firms who do not use the POFA, because there you have the DVLA confirming (in case a Judge doesn't get it) that a firm which doesn't use the POFA can only use the data under old pre-POFA rules - to ask who was driving, no more.

And it confirms that the deadline (in case a Judge doesn't get it) to serve a POFA NTK is 14 days by which it MUST be received/delivered.

LeedsMat

More lies from the BPA when I brought them up on the nonsense in their last reply:

As previously advised, ParkingEye Limited are not in breach of a point raised in our Code of Practice.

We advised the parking charge notice to have been issued right on the cusp of the deadlines as the notice was due to arrive on the last day of the relevant period. Therefore we believe the appropriate action was to cease pursuing the charge, which the operator did.

As per section 13.2, the entrance grace period allows a reasonable time for the motorist to enter the parking area, read the terms of conditions of parking and decide whether or not to stay and use the area. If staying, they are deemed to be agreeing to the advertised terms and conditions of parking and this time is included in the parking period -it is not a free period of parking. There is grace period of a minimum of 10 minutes which applies at the end of parking the period (and is separate from the entry grace period) to allow the motorist to leave the site, as per section 13.4 of the Code of Practice.

The parking charge notice was issued in line with, and taking into consideration, both section 13.2 and 13.4 of the Code of Practice.

I referred to my manager when replying on the 06/01/2017. With the information provided so far, this is the British Parking Association’s position and the matter will remain closed.

I guess I'm getting nowhere with them. They are now saying that you have to pay for the observation period if you decide to stay. Is this some new interpretation of grace periods? And they're still having problems with the basic maths need to work out whether the NTK was sent in time, despite me pointing out that two WORKING days are specified in POFA.

As well as complaining to Marcus Jones, is it worth reporting ParkingEye to the ICO? Does anyone know if they've ever taken action against parking companies, given the number of DPA breaches they seem to commit on a daily basis? Coupon-Mad indicated my case wasn't a DPA breach (see reply #7) but Umkomaas reckons it is (reply #16), so I'm a bit confused.

Thanks.

Coupon-mad

I think PE would argue they were entitled to obtain the data, which they were. They were NOT entitled to inform the keeper that they were liable (but I can't see that's a DPA breach, necessarily...it is misinformation and a DVLA/BPA issue but the BPA are hoping you will stop complaining).

But you could try an ICO complaint, nothing to lose - have a look at the 'DPA Principles' and maybe choose the one about not processing your data lawfully and the one about information held about you which is wrong (keeper liability)? If the ICO uphold your complaint you would be on a solid footing to sue.