****Help with POPLA appeal****

Umkomaas

jack123456 wrote: »

I really wished I would have done that now you've said it, one of those simple things that I've missed off. I will follow on with an e-mail to my Local MP and an MP for Sunderland also. I will also be contacting local press, to see if they are interested in the story.

Good stuff.

Coupon-mad

Really pleased to see your complaint in this case.

It does seem that ParkingEye may have (allegedly, let's see your explanation, PE) falsified/concocted data to create a PCN, when the date of the ANPR photos doesn't match the date from the P&D machine.

This needs exposing.

It is potentially every bit as bad as the UKPC doctoring of photos if it has occurred as suggested. Someone has created/signed off that PCN, it can't have been generated automatically by some automated process, if the ANPR photos didn't exist on the same date as the flawed P&D system data.

jack123456

I have had a reply about this from NHS England, they have directed me to Sunderland Royal to send the complaint to. NHS Trust Tyne and Wear have done the same also. They have stated that this has to be dealt with by the individual trust. I'm still waiting to hear back from PE and the DVLA.

jack123456

I have had a reply from PE, they have had this to say


30 June 2017
Reference: Parking Charge Notice - 022450/479698
Dear Sir / Madam,
We write further to your recent correspondence, which was received in relation to the
Parking Charge incurred on 23 February 2017 at 15:31, at Sunderland Royal Hospital -
Arterial Road car park.
We can confirm that your letter has now been reviewed, however, we must inform you
that your request for compensation is rejected. It is our position that there is no basis for
such a payment to be made by ParkingEye.
Yours faithfully,
ParkingEye Legal Department
ParkingEye Ltd

jack123456

jack123456 wrote: »

I have had a reply from PE, they have had this to say


30 June 2017
Reference: Parking Charge Notice - 022450/479698
Dear Sir / Madam,
We write further to your recent correspondence, which was received in relation to the
Parking Charge incurred on 23 February 2017 at 15:31, at Sunderland Royal Hospital -
Arterial Road car park.
We can confirm that your letter has now been reviewed, however, we must inform you
that your request for compensation is rejected. It is our position that there is no basis for
such a payment to be made by ParkingEye.
Yours faithfully,
ParkingEye Legal Department
ParkingEye Ltd

I also got this e-mail from Sunderland Royal


Dear Mr ....

Thank you for your further email. I have forwarded this onto Claire Dodds and requested that she contacts you to discuss.

Regards
Jade

Supporting the campaign:
<img width="184" height="55" class="yiv9778665902ycb7966373712" id="yiv9778665902_x0000_i1026">
Jade .... | Help and Advice Service Assistant | City Hospitals Sunderland

Coupon-mad

jack123456 wrote: »

I have had a reply from PE, they have had this to say


30 June 2017
Reference: Parking Charge Notice - 022450/479698
Dear Sir / Madam,
We write further to your recent correspondence, which was received in relation to the
Parking Charge incurred on 23 February 2017 at 15:31, at Sunderland Royal Hospital -
Arterial Road car park.
We can confirm that your letter has now been reviewed, however, we must inform you
that your request for compensation is rejected. It is our position that there is no basis for
such a payment to be made by ParkingEye.
Yours faithfully,
ParkingEye Legal Department
ParkingEye Ltd

cc: david.dunford@dvla.gsi.gov.uk

cc: steve.c@britishparking.co.uk

cc: Claire Dodds, Sunderland Royal Hospital


Dear ParkingEye,

re: Formal complaint regarding ParkingEye Ltd's misuse of data, and false dates, in PCN xxxxxx/xxxxxx

I am pleased to see you have reviewed the complaint. In that case, assuming your review was sufficiently thorough, you must have uncovered that the images used in your so-called 'PCN' were from 31st January.

To reiterate - there was no parking event, no visit at all, on 23 February 2017. The car was not there then, and it seems to me that ParkingEye has concocted a PCN from a 31st January image, and generated the imaginary February date from your faulty PDT system. This occurred despite ParkingEye's supposed '19 checks' by your staff that apparently take place before any PCN is issued, and cannot be blamed on a mere system error or oversight, because the PCN was a hybrid using two conflicting data records.

Due to the KADOE rules and the BPA Code of Practice, as well as your ICO registration, ParkingEye are undoubtedly the data controller in this matter and this entire episode is indisputably in breach of various data principles, the remedy for which is compensation to be paid to the wronged data subject. I suggest this complaint is escalated to your Legal Department, since ParkingEye cannot deflect this valid claim simply by saying ''your request for compensation is rejected. It is our position that there is no basis for such a payment to be made by ParkingEye''.

I beg to differ, and I am simply not going to go away. This matter has caused significant distress to me and my family.

I would like to draw your attention to a judgment last week at the Leeds County Court, 3SP00071 - Blamires v LGO. This was a claim for damages including a matter of a significant breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA). Of particular relevance was the award of £2,500 for distress arising from failure to prepare and keep accurate data records. As is now relatively well known, the DPA’s original drafting precluded compensation for distress alone, but the Court of Appeal, in Vidal Hall & ors v Google [2015] EWCA Civ 311, held that this was contrary to the provisions of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and that, accordingly, there was a right under the DPA to claim compensation for “pure” distress. The award in Blamires v LGO was of “Vidal Hall” compensation, with the judge saying there was ''no doubt in my mind that the data breaches have caused distress to the claimant in their own rights as well as as a result of the consequences that flowed.''

The judge awarded a further £2,500 aggravated damages because of the manner in which the Defendant conducted its case, including the fact that, notwithstanding being told by the Claimant that its conduct/data was wrong, it took nearly two years for the Defendant to admit the mistake.

I expect ParkingEye to admit its mistake.

I require a full and frank explanation, as I am sure, does the NHS Trust, and I reserve my rights regarding this distressing matter. I urge ParkingEye to treat this issue with the seriousness it deserves, not least because you are already acting outwith the will of Parliament by operating a 'PCN income only' (very obviously incentivised) parking regime at an NHS location, where your victims are likely to be vulnerable. I expect ParkingEye to urgently discuss and explain this failure of your systems and data control with the BPA, the DVLA and the NHS Trust, and in fairness to all patients affected, identify all other such cases.

It goes without saying that the matter will require the NHS Trust, and its agent ParkingEye, to report the failure of its data control to the Information Commissioner.

I look forward to receiving a more thorough response, and this time, kindly offer me the courtesy of using my name in your salutation. I look forward to ParkingEye's offer of settlement within 21 days.

yours faithfully,

jack123456

That's brilliant! I'll be posting that off to them on Monday! It's just the fact they didn't even refer to me by my name, just 'dear sir/madam'.

Hopefully Sunderland Royal will take things a bit more seriously!

Thank you 😊

Coupon-mad

I've edited some more in, compensation for you is calling...

Oh, and NEVER post to ParkingEye. Email:

enforcement@parkingeye.co.uk

and copy in the people I have written 'cc' to (not blind copies) so that PE can see you have copied them all in...

jack123456

I'll get straight to that! Thank you so much.

It felt like such a standard reply from them, thinking I would just go away and leave them alone. I'm glad you gave me their e-mail address I didn't trust I would even get a response writing to them. I'll keep you all updated!

jack123456

Just sent the response to them now (had a hectic few days). Here's to hoping for a good response!