June 2018 - start of the new PPC and DVLA fightback (GDPR related)

abedegno

Umkomaas wrote: »

Well done for your persistence on this. A bit of a poke in the eye for ParkingEye! A bit of a damp response from the ICO in terms of proactively monitoring whether PE do anything whatsoever to comply.

You're right, this is a bit damp response - but this is similar to other responses I have had from the ICO where an organisation appears to be non-compliant with data protection law. I think ultimately as a regulator the ICO is significantly under-resourced and unless there is a significant data protection breach they leave civil prosecution to the complainant.

Should I begin my own action and reach the County Court sticking the ICO's response in front of the judge would be highly probative.

beamerguy

Umkomaas wrote: »

Well done for your persistence on this. A bit of a poke in the eye for ParkingEye! A bit of a damp response from the ICO in terms of proactively monitoring whether PE do anything whatsoever to comply.

Do you remember ParkingEye saying they keep data in case the police etc want it ....... ????

Where needed we should advise people to complain to ICO as well

Umkomaas

beamerguy wrote: »

Do you remember ParkingEye saying they keep data in case the police etc want it ....... ????

In their role of helping to reduce crime!

abedegno

I've now sent an email to ParkingEye to poke the bear - if they are still non-compliant will sent a LBC and see what happens

sparkyhx

just received a GDPR response from HX Car Park Management, who say they don't keep any data unless it relates to an infringement. I've queried the police and law enforcement/investigation angle - but if what they say is true it looks like they are following good practice.


But at the same time they say they have no Automated Decision making - which I find hard to believe that it is a manual process to look at photos on entry/exit and match to a Pay and display machine to see if there are any infringements.


I don't buy it? anyone else have a view on that one?

beamerguy

sparkyhx wrote: »

just received a GDPR response from HX Car Park Management, who say they don't keep any data unless it relates to an infringement. I've queried the police and law enforcement/investigation angle - but if what they say is true it looks like they are following good practice.


But at the same time they say they have no Automated Decision making - which I find hard to believe that it is a manual process to look at photos on entry/exit and match to a Pay and display machine to see if there are any infringements.


I don't buy it? anyone else have a view on that one?

With the methods the scammers and dodgy legals use, nobody can buy anything that any of them say.

They built the scam all by themselves, they simply cannot command any trust ........ they created it

Castle

sparkyhx wrote: »

But at the same time they say they have no Automated Decision making - which I find hard to believe that it is a manual process to look at photos on entry/exit and match to a Pay and display machine to see if there are any infringements.

I don't buy it? anyone else have a view on that one?

If there are no automated decision making, then ask them who decided to take a photo of your vehicle entering and leaving.

LoneStarState

abedegno wrote: »

You're right, this is a bit damp response - but this is similar to other responses I have had from the ICO where an organisation appears to be non-compliant with data protection law. I think ultimately as a regulator the ICO is significantly under-resourced and unless there is a significant data protection breach they leave civil prosecution to the complainant

Just revisited this thread and agree with the sentiment above. Given it's a year since the Britannia ticket received by a family member that was later cancelled, will strongly recommend them to exercise right of erasure given the time lapsed in light of what the ICO has said above (Admittedly a ticket was issued in our case but then cancelled by the landowner, so would probably not be classed as "non infringement parking").

I definitely want to test the ICO with regards to Britannia's privacy policy that stipulates they will retain personal data for 7 years after the contractual relationship ends (i.e. non infringement parking). They also mention that if enforcement action is used against you, they may maintain records for more than 7 years, effectively giving them carte blanche to hold your data as long as they please. Makes me wonder how they treat the personal data for tickets where landowners have cancelled or a court has found against the parking Co or multiple POPLA appeals have been won by the same "infringing" keeper/driver/hirer etc.

steve1500

sparkyhx wrote: »

just received a GDPR response from HX Car Park Management, who say they don't keep any data unless it relates to an infringement. I've queried the police and law enforcement/investigation angle - but if what they say is true it looks like they are following good practice.


But at the same time they say they have no Automated Decision making - which I find hard to believe that it is a manual process to look at photos on entry/exit and match to a Pay and display machine to see if there are any infringements.


I don't buy it? anyone else have a view on that one?

Of course it is automated decision making

Been helping someone who has received an invoice from HX One word

Rollocks


Also a lot of people are mentioning retention periods - it is supposed to be on the signage along with a load of other stuff - Article 13.


So if complaining to the ICO please say they are not complying with Article 13

steve1500

sparkyhx wrote: »

just received a GDPR response from HX Car Park Management, who say they don't keep any data unless it relates to an infringement. I've queried the police and law enforcement/investigation angle - but if what they say is true it looks like they are following good practice.

sorry missed this bit, Police, Taxation exemption - Cobblers

What is the crime

They must get their advice about DPA from the same bit of the internet that says you can ignore the invoices