High Point Village PCN by PCM

princess989

My daughter and I attended the Canal Festival at High Point Village, Hayes on Sunday 16th September. She took part in the school choir performance for Hayes FM.

We were dropped off outside Tesco as there were no available parking spaces - the only one left was too tight for the family carrier. The driver drove off after 20 seconds.

Next thing we know we get a PCN for £100, reduced to £60 if paid within 14 days. I was outraged when I checked their photo evidence online. They took pictures of my daughter and I all the way from leaving the car until we entered the building. Isn't that harassment and intrusion into our privacy?

I appealed to PCM online and my appeal was rejected. They sent me a definition of parked as I argued that the car stopped for 20 seconds only.They sent photo evidence of road markings showing it is a private road, no dropping, stopping or collecting and the 2 road signs, located half way inside the road. The road markings are also half way inside the road, over a hump and drivers do not stand a chance to see them if there is a car in front of you, not to mention they look faded. The road signs show a distinctive green P for parking and some other wording that no driver can read unless you stop the car to read them. The green P is also misleading making you think as a driver that parking is available there and think nothing else of reading the rest of the sign or you'll be blocking the traffic behind you if you stop to read it. These two signs half way inside the road do not lay out any contract nor mention of an applicable parking fine and the amount to pay. They just read "Private road. Terms and conditions apply. No stopping,dropping or collection" No contract is laid out clearly detailing terms, conditions and charges. How can you agree to something you have not been given to read?

This happened during a public event at High Point Village and I am guessing it happened to many drivers on that day. If you are one of those drivers please comment below and let me know if you have been successful in your appeal.

I am now unsure of what to do after reading several threads on this forum about dealing with IPC. I have until Friday before the charge goes up to £100. I phoned my home insurance legal advice line and they say I must have compelling evidence or mitigating circumstances such as the passengers having a health condition or disability that required any of them to be dropped off close to the building.

harrys_dad

Your insurance company's legal advice is rubbish. Do not pay this invoice. Have you read the stickies? Read them first, then see what need to do. Did you receive the notice as keeper? Did you identify the driver in your appeal? Read the stickies, follow the advice, post a start on here then very experienced people will be along to help you.

princess989

This is my letter of appeal.

The car stopped briefly. Stopping briefly IS NOT PARKING and the driver could not have entered into any contract because a contract cannot be forbidding and, in any case, the driver had no chance to read and accept the terms of any contract before the alleged contravention occurred, particularly when there are no clear signs at the road entrance that identifies it as a private road. Reasonable time should be allowed for the driver to read the signs and terms and conditions of the contract before you issue a fine, which from the driver's position are not easily readable as the sign is too high up as seen in the photograph. Therefore, the driver needs to stop briefly and safely to read the terms and conditions of your so called contract and then decide whether to park, therefore agreeing to the contract, or drive off. The car is seen driving off after 20 seconds, a reasonable time to read the terms and conditions, disagree and drive off. Additionally, I believe this fine to be unreasonable and unfair because I understand the landowner has agreed to a 10 minute grace period. The time stamp in the pictures demonstrate that the car was not stopped long enough. The car is clearly not obstructing anybody. I wonder what the landowner will think of your unreasonable, unfair demands.

Furthermore, you have no right to take pictures of the passengers, one of whom is a minor. Did you seek their permission? I consider this as harassment and I demand, under the Data Protection Act that their photographs be deleted immediately to protect their privacy and written confirmation be sent to me. I am not happy with their photographs to be held on your online servers. This is causing them distress and anxiety and legal action will follow if you fail to remove these photographs.

Furthermore, you cannot use Section 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 to transfer liability to the registered keeper because the location of the alleged contravention is subject to statutory control, and I am under no obligation to name the driver.

As a result, there is no legally-enforceable parking charge and no justification for you to pursue me. You have, therefore, obtained my personal information without reasonable cause. This is a clear breach of data protection principles 1 and 2 of the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA). Your unreasonable and unlawful demand for payment is causing me significant distress and anxiety.

I demand that you immediately cease and desist from processing my personal data, except to inform me that you have complied with this demand. Any further processing of my personal data, including demands for payment or passing my personal data to any third party, will be considered harassment and a flagrant disregard of the GDPR, which will be reported to DVLA and to your ATA, and may result in legal action against you for compensation or damages, including Exemplary or Punitive damages.

The GDPR requires you to respond to this notice within 1 month.

princess989

We never identified the driver. I have read other threads and I have not found anyone yet that has been successful appealing to IPC.

Coupon-mad

What utter rubbish from the legal insurance adviser!

This is a scam and you need to read more about PCM, ex-clamper chancers who were outed by Watchdog for saying about 'appeals' ''we make it up most of the time'' (or words to that effect) when secretly recorded by an undercover person on the programme.

princess989 wrote: »

We never identified the driver. I have read other threads and I have not found anyone yet that has been successful appealing to IPC.

Stop looking, you will not find one; the IAS even side with PCM for these 'PCNs in seconds' cases.

It is an 'outrageous scam', as was said in Parliament in February.

There was no appeal that would work, and certainly do not try IAS stage which is even worse and a national scandal, due to the conflict of interests of the Trade body (IPC), the IAS, and Gladstones Solicitors who file the court claims, all sharing Directors.

You could not make up a bigger scam that plays out every day, and PCM are the worst for PCNs in seconds, that would never stand up in court. Google 'Parking Prankster Mrs Sunglasses PCM' and read about them!

We were dropped off outside Tesco as there were no available parking spaces - the only one left was too tight for the family carrier. The driver drove off after 20 seconds.

Next thing we know we get a PCN for £100, reduced to £60 if paid within 14 days. I was outraged when I checked their photo evidence online. They took pictures of my daughter and I all the way from leaving the car until we entered the building. Isn't that harassment and intrusion into our privacy?

Send a complaint to PCM's Data Protection Officer (who might well be the same person who replied to your appeal and 'makes it up' as he/she goes along).

PCM might have a 'privacy' policy page that gives a contact address for the DPO. Tell the DPO that you object to the data processing, as there is no reasonable cause to have your DVLA data, based on 20 seconds - which is not even enough time to see a sign, let alone read it - and that you have serious concerns about PCM taking intrusive photos of the driver and daughter (child I assume, as you mentioned a school choir?) walking away from the car in those seconds as she was dropped off which is not parking at all, it's ''assisted boarding/alighting'' of a child into premises.

Wait for Mrs Sunglasses' best mate, the DPO, to tell you that your concerns are baseless. THEN make an online complaint all about PCM to the Information Commissioner online (easy to do, and you can upload photos and links to the Parking Prankster blogs about Mrs Sunglasses and the way she and other PCM employees hide then rush out to take intrusive photos of people within seconds, when in fact the IPC Code of Practice says a firm MUST allow a driver sufficient time to read a sign. If the signs says 'no parking' then it is entrapment to take a pic that quickly as no-one can have read the PCM signs.

It's high time PCM were reported for these tactics to the ICO. You can start! Taking pics of a child and following them is well worth reporting to the ICO.

princess989

This is their reply.

Thank you for your correspondence regarding the above Parking Charge Notice. I have considered your case carefully and have decided to reject your appeal on the following grounds:

You parked in a manner wherever you agreed to pay a charge. The Parking Attendant recorded that the vehicle was parked outside a marked bay.

The site is private land and is managed an operated by Parking Control Management. The Parking Charge Notice has been issued in accordance with this parking management scheme. The signage in the area is clear and informs motorists of the contractual obligations you agree to by parking in this area. By parking in this manner, you agree to pay the stated charge.

The restrictions require that a vehicle is parked wholly within the confines of a marked bay. Photographic evidence shows your vehicle to be parked outside ofa bay and as such a charge was issued.

The vehicle was parked in the access road whilst dropping passengers. A dictionary definition of parked is vehicle stopped and left in a place for a period of time. The appellant vehicle is stopped outside of the marked bay and is left in situ for a period of time, albeit a short period. It is worth noting that several short term bays were available as seen in the enforcement photographs.

The vehicle appears to have stopped in the access road in order to drop a passenger. It was stationary whilst passenger exited the vehicle. If the vehicle had been merely performing a manoeuvre or in a line of traffic, the vehicle would not have been photographed.

Signage and road marking in the area is clear - stopping and waiting or drop and collection is not permitted. The vehicle was parked; therefore the driver agreed to pay the charge.

Thank you for your enquiry, regarding the use of your personal data. I have passed this on to our Data Protection Officer who will respond in due course. In the meantime, you may wish to read our Privacy Policy, available on our website at ...

You now have a number of options:

1. Pay the PCN at the discounted amount of £60 within 14 days. Please note that after this time, you will be liable to pay the full charge of £100.

2. If you believe this decision is incorrect, the IAS provides an alternative Dispute Resolution scheme. As you have complied with our internal appeals procedure you may use, and we will engage with, the IAS Standard Appeals Service providing you lodge an appeal to them within 21 days of this rejection.

If you choose to do nothing, we will seek to recover the monies owed to us via our debt recovery procedures and may proceed with Court action against you. If no payment is received within 28 days we may refer your case to our instructed debt Recovery Company and/or solicitors, at which point the charge will increase to £160.

Coupon-mad

Standard template.

Hence, complain to their DPO (to give PCM a chance to reply properly, and because the ICO insist on it).

Then when that hapless PCM 'employee' (for want of a better term, for someone who must be looking for a real job) says get lost, you do as advised above and show the ICO your serious concerns about the intrusive photos being taken within seconds, of children and drivers, without reasonable cause and outwith the IPC CoP.

There is no point complaining to the IPC, who will do nothing at all.

princess989

[QUOTE=
Send a complaint to PCM's Data Protection Officer (who might well be the same person who replied to your appeal and 'makes it up' as he/she goes along).

PCM might have a 'privacy' policy page that gives a contact address for the DPO. Tell the DPO that you object to the data processing, as there is no reasonable cause to have your DVLA data, based on 20 seconds - which is not even enough time to see a sign, let alone read it - and that you have serious concerns about PCM taking intrusive photos of the driver and daughter (child I assume, as you mentioned a school choir?) walking away from the car in those seconds as she was dropped off which is not parking at all, it's ''assisted boarding/alighting'' of a child into premises.

[/QUOTE]

The driver never left the car. My daughter and I did. I just had a look at the parking sign right where we were dropped off. from their own photo evidence. I'm 5'2ft That sign must be at least 7ft. It's way taller than me standing outside the car. Impossible for driver to see without getting out of the car first. He never did any way so could not have even noticed it.

Redx

yep, we know, WELCOME TO OUR WORLD


watch the videos of the MP,s debating it in the House Of Commons and the Committee rooms too


until the MP,s sort it out, this farce will continue, so wise up , you are getting the best free advice in the country, for free


we know its a sc@m, it was in those other places that MRS SUNGLASSES lurked too

Coupon-mad

The driver never left the car. My daughter and I did. I just had a look at the parking sign right where we were dropped off. from their own photo evidence.

I'm 5'2ft That sign must be at least 7ft. It's way taller than me standing outside the car. Impossible for driver to see without getting out of the car first. He never did any way so could not have even noticed it.

We know. Typical scam.

Have you Googled what I told you to Google and found the extent of this scam yet?

princess989

Yes, I just googled it Coupon-mad. This is exactly our thoughts, not to mention we never noticed the signs because they show a green P. You associate green with positive stuff,parking allowed and don't stop to read the rest, especially when you are driving into a road and your intention is dropping off a passenger, not parking. Can I reply to their letter using their online appeal form again or would they ignore it this time?