Parking Eye and ANPR timing

Volvo_Parker

Good morning all.


I'm looking for some 'next step' help with a ParkingEye PCN and Popla complaint.


I received a ParkingEye PCN after parking in a car park in private car park in Darlington which is ANPR managed by ParkingEye. Time of entry was recorded at 15.29.07 and after parking up and sorting myself out I bought a ticket for 1 hours parking which the ticket showed as expiring at 16.30 which would infer the start time as being 15.30. My exit time is recorded by the ANPR as 16.41.00.


Note, the ANPR records to the nearest second, the ticket issued from the machine to the nearest minute.


I have been through a POPLA appeal and they have avoided any comment on the difference between the recorded ANPR 'start time' and the start time shown on the ticket issued by the machine. I have attempted to raise a complaint with POPLA for failing to consider the conflicting 'start times' without satisfactory response on the timing issue.


I have this weekend received ParkingEye's 'Letter before County Court Claim' and I'm looking for practical guidance on how to proceed and whether there is any realistic potential for this to be reconsidered by POPLA, or dropped under challenge by ParkingEye?


So in simple terms, can they enforce a PCN when the 'start' time on the ANPR differs from the 'start' time inferred on the ticket from the machine?


Thanks

KeithP

Volvo_Parker wrote: »

So in simple terms, can they enforce a PCN when the 'start' time on the ANPR differs from the 'start' time inferred on the ticket from the machine?

They can certainly try.

In a pay and display car park with ANPR, almost without exception the times on the PDT will differ from the times recorded by ANPR.
That's what Grace Periods are about. When entering a car park a driver is allowed some time to read the signs, decided whether to stay or not before being committed to any charge.

Coupon-mad

So in simple terms, can they enforce a PCN when the 'start' time on the ANPR differs from the 'start' time inferred on the ticket from the machine?

Yep that do this all the time, unfairly and disproportionately working AGAINST the consumer when their PDT machine data actually tells them when the contract starts, but they ignore that. Against the DPA & ICO rules, then.

Someone should complain to the ICO about the mismatch of the two 'data sets' (ANPR entry time versus PDT time) being contrary to the first data protection principle and against the ICO Surveillance Camera Code of Practice. Why not look that up and do a formal complaint to the ICO on that basis, at the same time as:

- replying to the LBCCC BY EMAIL* and banging on about grace periods and the fact they don't comply with the ICO Code of Practice for Surveillance Cameras (search the forum for 'surveillance' to find what they do wrong).

- complaining to the landowner (that will only get PE to 'offer' £60 settlement).

- waiting till 25th May then sending PE a SAR (Google it or search this forum).

Basically you were charged for being 11 minutes over, but in 2015 a formal meeting with the BPA agreed to change the BPA Code of Practice to allow 'at least 11 minutes' to leave, to match byelaws rules...it then never happened, but it was agreed by the BPA at a stakeholder's meeting.



*enforcement@parkingeye.co.uk

Volvo_Parker

Thank you for the comments.


My understanding is that the 'Grace Period' which is a minimum of 10 minutes is intended as a time between expiry and enforcement, and is not intended to cover differences between ANPR timing triggers you entering a car park and you actually buying a ticket. Ditto for when you leave the car park.


Is there any guidance to confirm when your 'parking session' actually starts and stop, is this when you enter and leave a car park, or when your car is parked in a parking bay?


Thanks

KeithP

Your understanding of grace periods is only half the story.
There are two grace periods - one upon entry and one at exit time.

Have you read the BPA CoP condition 13 which says time must be allowed for the driver to read the signs and decide whether to stay or not?

Volvo_Parker

KeithP wrote: »

Your understanding of grace periods is only half the story.
There are two grace periods - one upon entry and one at exit time.

Have you read the BAP Cop condition 13 which says time must be allowed for the driver to read the signs and decide whether to stay or not?

I've read the BAP CoP and I think you are incorrect in your assessment, there is no provision for the grace period to apply at both the start and end of the parking session, only two interpretations of the application of a minimum 10 minutes grace period.

Coupon-mad

Is there any guidance to confirm when your 'parking session' actually starts and stop, is this when you enter and leave a car park, or when your car is parked in a parking bay?

No, if there was we would have told you.

I did explain, in ANPR car parks that also have PDT machines, there is a serious and inherent mismatch of two 'data sets' that PE hold both, and they prefer the one that disadvantages the driver. Hence:

The ICO complaint is the way to go, plus everything else I advised you to now do.

Please can you show us the draft ICO complaint first. It's vital that whoever does this does it properly and robustly and makes it clear this is NOT like the Beavis case as that was a free car park, with no mismatch of machine payment time as opposed to driving-in time.

An ICO complaint like this has not been done before and is well overdue form this forum!

KeithP

http://www.britishparking.co.uk/News/good-car-parking-practice-includes-grace-periods

"The BPA’s guidance specifically says that there must be sufficient time for the motorist to park their car, observe the signs, decide whether they want to comply with the operator’s conditions and either drive away or pay for a ticket,” he explains.

“No time limit is specified. This is because it might take one person five minutes, but another person 10 minutes depending on various factors, not limited to disability.”

Coupon-mad

You will get nowhere with a POPLA complaint though.

Do the ICO complaint with our help, we need someone to try this properly re a ANPR/PDT timing/data clash.

Volvo_Parker

Given I have no idea who the ICO are, I'm out.


I've given up with POPLA (utterly useless) and the guidance on here is so confusing and fragmented you need to be an expert to guide your way through the posts and the multiple variations of guidance.


I'm not a solicitor and certainly won't be employing one to structure a response to some other body to defend a £100 ticket when there is no test-case to say such a defence would be effective.


Frustrating.

nosferatu1001

The ICO is the body which deals with data protection breaches
A 2 min google will tell you that.