PCN, but clearly not even my vehicle!

james_09

Just received a PCN from Civil Enforcement Ltd for my wife's car. I'm assuming it will be a pretty easy to appeal, but I thought I would post to show how completely incompetent these people are.

Basically the car in the picture has a number plate very similar to my wife's, but they have mistaken a V for Y. It's actually really obvious it is a V from the picture.

You might think that was a fairly easy mistake to make, but the car in the picture is clearly a light silver Vauxhall and yet they state the vehicle caught on the notice is a blue Polo (which my wife's car is). Obviously they have incorrectly pulled data from the DVLA on my wife car.

Not to mention this happened about 100 miles away from where we live.

There is no way anyone could have possibly looked at this notice because none of the details on the notice even remotely resemble the car in the picture, other than the number plate being similar!

Umkomaas

Complain to the DVLA:

ccrt@dvla.gsi.gov.uk

And the BPA:

steve.c@britishparking.co.uk

Coupon-mad

And to the ICO, please please please do this too:

https://ico.org.uk/make-a-complaint/your-personal-information-concerns/

The complaint must be put in by the data subject (the rk of that car). Your wife?

System

Complain to the DVLA:

ccrt@dvla.gsi.gov.uk

And the BPA:

steve.c@britishparking.co.uk

Yes to the DVLA and no to the BPA. Why give CEL any room? There is clear data misuse here and the DVLA insist there should be checking - and yet they don't check.

When the reply comes back from the DVLA, if it is unsatisfactory, then go to the ICO. The ICO won't act on random complaints. They have to see the DVLA or a response from the company as you are supposed to give CEL the chance to rectify and remove the information.

james_09

Oh dear this is getting worse. I have just received another fine for the same car, in the same location, but for the following day. Same picture description e.t.c

Ralph-y

just to add to the list of people to complain to ......


read / watch





https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2018-02-02/debates/CC84AF5E-AC6E-4E14-81B1-066E6A892807/Parking(CodeOfPractice)Bill

and slightly longer, the committee stage

https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/d5550515-cce9-4185-83ec-754dadb7524a

''Rip-offs from car park Cowboys must stop''; unfair treatment; signage deliberately confusing to ensure a PCN is issued; ''years of abuse by rogue parking companies''; bloodsuckers; ''the current system of regulation is hopeless, like putting Dracula in charge of the blood-bank''; extortionate fines; rogue operators; ''sense of injustice''; unfair charges and notices; wilfully misleading; signage is a deliberate act to deceive or mislead; ''confusing signs are often deliberate, to trap innocent drivers''; unreasonable; a curse; harassing; operating in a disgusting way; appeals service is no guarantee of a fair hearing; loathed; outrageous scam; dodgy practice; outrageous abuse; unscrupulous practices; ''the British Parking Association is as much use as a multi-storey car park in the Gobi desert''; and finally, by way of unanimous conclusion: ''we need to crack down on these rogue companies. They are an absolute disgrace to this country. Ordinary motorists and ordinary residents should not have to put up with this''.

These are the exact words used, so you should quote them to your MP in a complaint and ask him/her to contact Sir Greg Knight MP if he wants further information about this scam.

and some quotes from the committe stage

"The other area is hospital parking, and I want to single out one company for some pretty shady practices. That is ParkingEye"
" is very clear to me that there is collusion between parking companies and solicitors’ firms—so-called roboclaims companies. "
"They are often set up adjacently and involve the same directors and personnel. Incidentally, the same personnel get involved in the so-called appeals bodies."
"Essentially, it is a money-making enterprise that takes advantage of motorists up and down the country. They operate in a very business-like fashion, which is why I call them roboclaims companies."
"The companies are jamming up parts of our legal system."
“I now pretty much know exactly how the parking companies and in particular the IPC have been running this scam for the past 5 years. Basically both of the appeals processes are a complete and utter sham, (and part of that sham is Gladstones Solicitors itself)”
"The appeals process at Excel/VCS is run by a team of minimum wage office workers with no legal knowledge or experience whatsoever,"
" It is claimed by the head of the appeals service (retired Judge Bryn Holloway) that this is a completely independent fair process, it is not”
"The letter mentions two individuals—Will Hurley and Bryn Holloway—and concludes this is a typical example of the clear collusion between the IPC, their members and the IAS"
"what we can do about roboclaims companies and solicitors firms that profit, often in shady ways"
" the very large amounts of money that can be involved in such scams—a company called Smart Parking was involved in one such scam on my patch"
"tightening up the rules regarding the unfair use of automatic number plate recognition" "BW Legal, regularly issues 10,000 county court judgments a month, and is known to have issued 28,000 in one month"
"They are jamming up our court system, and are often totally unjustified."
" because the lifeblood of trying to extort money from people is having access to their details."

All from Parking (Code of Practice) Bill (First sitting) Hansard








Ralph:cool:

System

Luckily you know what to do.....

Guys_Dad

However, the misrecognition of the number plate is gold dust to those of us who claim that ANPR is faulty. Hold on to the letters and the evidence as it might be a good precedent for the warriors on this forum.

Coupon-mad

Even better for the data subject's ICO complaint (please do that this week!). It is clear evidence of data processing negligence, and excessive reliance upon ANPR that is faulty, and proof that these PCNs are issued without sufficient manual checks.

peter_the_piper

Another good reason to have a dash cam as you can prove that you were nowhere near the carparks at the time.

Johno100

peter_the_piper wrote: »

Another good reason to have a dash cam as you can prove that you were nowhere near the carparks at the time.

Not really, any footage could come from any random vehicle. Even if it one of those cameras that has an overlay including registration number, that can easily be changed.