POPLA stage (EuroCarParks appeal) - do I have grounds?

BlackTalos1

Hello All,

First, thank you for taking your time to read and help, it is much appreciated. First offence and new user. Started at the NEWBIES thread.

Why I believe I have ground to appeal:
- Caught by ANPR from 11:54 to 13:05 in a "Max 60min" Halfords Car park. I am quite sure i arrived at 11:59 and left 13:04, allowing both the 10min leeway rules and "rounding up" of the ANPR system
- I have location proof from my phone as the "maybe driver" (not admitted yet) for which I can upload an example once I get access to Links. Shows my location "on-site" from 12:01 until 13:04 but then somewhere else at 13:05.
Only issue with this is the counter-reason below.
- I was with family incl. 6-month old child, grounds as a carer for newborn baby.

Why i'm considering to drop the appeal and pay:
- We did not shop at Halfords but instead had some lunch in the town nearby. "Customers only" is lettered very large on the signs of the Car Park.

PCN:

Not yet allowed to post links - this would be a PCN scan, details hidden.

sorry

I have followed the NEWBIES thread and appealed on EuCarP website with the following letter:

Re PCN number: ~~removed~~

I appeal and dispute your 'parking charge', as the keeper of the vehicle. I deny any liability.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn, nor was there an agreed contract. Your signage terms fail the test of 'large lettering' and prominence of the parking charge, as established in ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis, which is fully distinguished.

Should you fail to cancel this PCN, I require with your rejection letter, all images taken of this vehicle & the signs at the location that day. Do not withhold any images or data later relied on for POPLA/court including proof of the time recorded by ANPR, as there is evidence to suggest these are incorrect. Clause #13 of the BPA CoP applies here and this appeal, any subsequent appeal and also any court case will have this as a prominent argument as to why this invoice should be cancelled

Firms of your ilk were unanimously condemned in 2018 as operating an 'outrageous scam' (Hansard 2.2.18). The BPA & IPC were heavily criticised too; hardly surprising for an industry where so-called AOS members admit to letting victims 'futilely go through the motions' of appeal and say on camera 'we make it up sometimes' (BBC Watchdog).

I will be making a formal complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner, as well as complaining in writing to my MP and ensuring that they are appraised of the debate where Parliament agreed unanimously: ''we need to crack down on these rogue companies. They are an absolute disgrace to this country. Ordinary motorists...should not have to put up with this''.

Formal note:

Service of any rejection letter/POPLA code and/or legal documents by email is expressly disallowed. All responses to me from this point on, must be made by post. Regardless of any MCOL online/email system, service of any court claim must only be made by first class post to the latest address provided by me.

Yours faithfully,
~~Name and address where PCN received~~

As a side note, they misspelled my first name (e.g John / Jon - not my real name), something I did not correct in the response to EuCarP. Though I doubt this will have any effect.

They refused the appeal, with a response emailed to the email address provided. Nothing in the post as per the appeal request.

I will get to writing the POPLA Appeal with grounds listed above over this week, but the "Half Price Discount" for the Fine is tomorrow/Thursday, so do I pay this or would the grounds above cover me to take it to the end?

Thank you for reading and any support!

KeithP

Why are you considering paying?

You don't owe anything until a County Court Judge tells you to pay.

Here is the likelyhood of any judge even getting near enough to even think about making such a call:

http://www.parkingappeals.info/companydata/Euro_Car_Parks.html

That's nearly a million tickets issued but only three court appearances in the last three years.

That's odds of around 300,000 to 1

Looks good to me.

Coupon-mad

- Caught by ANPR from 11:54 to 13:05 in a "Max 60min" Halfords Car park. I am quite sure i arrived at 11:59 and left 13:04, allowing both the 10min leeway rules and "rounding up" of the ANPR system
- I have location proof from my phone as AN OCCUPANT OF THE CAR for which I can upload an example once I get access to Links. Shows my location "on-site" from 12:01 until 13:04 but then somewhere else at 13:05.
Only issue with this is the counter-reason below.
- I was with family incl. 6-month old child, grounds as a carer for newborn baby.

Your first reason wins the day. Forget the second argument (mitigating circs) entirely.

You have the proof (we've now seen this three times) that BPA members set their ANPR clocks wrongly, so the ''in'' image is several minutes behind real time, and makes it look like people overstay.

That's arguably fraudulent, certainly negligent. Like here on pepipoo with ParkingEye:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=123566&st=0&gopid=1429415&#entry1429415

I've told that OP to complain to the ICO first, not the BPA yet or they'll cancel the PCN.

So I suggest you do exactly the same, an ICO complaint, with your evidence that the ANPR cameras are set at least SIX minutes or more out, so that people are accused of overstays who provably have NOT.

Honestly this is shocking and needs ICO complaints nice and early.

Your POPLA appeal can wait 4 weeks - the POPLA code will last 32 days. Lets' get this data processing fraud reported to the ICO sharpish!

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

i'm considering to drop the appeal and pay...
...but the "Half Price Discount" for the Fine is tomorrow/Thursday, so do I pay this...?

Nononononononononononononononono and more, NO! Absolutely NOT.

NO.

If the ICO agree and uphold your complaint you could sue ECP.

They never sue people so you are safe, and I am not saying don't do the POPLA appeal, I am saying diarise 4 weeks from the date of the rejection email (it doesn't matter too much that they emailed you when you told them not to, but you could throw it in as an extra concern to the ICO as it's another data processing issue...but the BIG issue is what looks like an attempt to obtain monies by deception...).

I think once people have their ICO complaint upheld they should be submitting their evidence in the end, to Action Fraud and their MP.

STEVE CLARK, WHAT SAY YOU...IF YOU ARE READING THIS YOUR OLD BOYS ARE ABOUT TO COME A CROPPER...

notparked

if your sign looked like this, POPLA ruled that it was not compliant due to the parking charge not being as prominent as other text.
So the POPLA number and assessor could be used in your appeal.

BlackTalos1

Thank you for all of the pointers, I will start drafting up the POPLA appeal, post it here when it is ready.

I'll start putting in the ICO complaint in the mean time.

There is a reason why I put "Quite sure" in my first post though:
I'm not able to guarantee +/- 5mins on the Apple Location data from my phone. It could have "started a little late".
Also it records my location in town, which would be 2-3mins walk also. I will try to upload exactly what I mean once I can put links in.

Apologies if circumventing is not allowed, but the images are hosted here:
Standard https code with double slash, "ibb" dot "co/", then images
"ctobiL"
"gMKhOL"
"m2FBHf"

BlackTalos1

notparked wrote: »

if your sign looked like this, POPLA ruled that it was not compliant due to the parking charge not being as prominent as other text.
So the POPLA number and assessor could be used in your appeal.



snipped

If you swap the 4 1/2 for "1 hour" it is almost identical.

KeithP

Here's your links:

https://ibb.co/ctobiL

https://ibb.co/gMKhOL

https://ibb.co/m2FBHf

BlackTalos1

KeithP wrote: »

Here's your links:

Thank you !

First one is the "On-site" at / near car park.

Second one is showing I was Somewhere else at 13:05.

Third one is from 11:07 about 7 miles and 15 mins away (leaving an "unproven Gap" from 11:25 till 12:00).

We are still talking about 11 minutes overstay when the grace period is 10 !

Coupon-mad

Looks like decent evidence to me. You even prove you were not driving out at 1.05pm, but were somewhere else.

I think the ICO need to see this and I mean NOW, tonight, don't draft something over the 'next few days' - just do the complaint online tonight, show them the PCN and show them your phone location evidence and tell them you believe that this is negligent or fraudulent ANPR data massaging, proving that the time on the IN and OUT cameras are both wrong.

Confirm that you HAVE already complained/appealed to the trader, and they have rejected your dispute, hence why you want the ICO to look at the huge issue here which is not the only such ANPR timing 'error' case on parking forums right now...seems to be endemic.

And parking firms are pretending thousands of people have overstayed who have not, and profiting at £100 a pop from each victim.

Be REALLY ROBUST in the ICO complaint, and attach your evidence & the PCN and rejection email, and add as an aside that the trader ignored your clear request NOT to email the POPLA code, which is another less worrying concern, but a data handling issue nonetheless, because they've used an email address they were asked not to use for this purpose.

Don't worry that your data might not be right...why would it not be...let the ICO decide.

We are still talking about 11 minutes overstay when the grace period is 10 !

The GRACE PERIODS (plural) are not ten minutes.

It is an UNSPECIFIED time at arrival to read signs, park, and pay or decide to stay. Then ANOTHER SEPARATE period of at least ten minutes on top, to leave after allowed parking time.

The BPA says so:

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

But PLEASE do not complicate the ICO complaint. It is not about that, it's about the inaccurate ANPR timings, and possible fraud.

HTH

Umkomaas

We are still talking about 11 minutes overstay when the minimum grace period is 10 !

Fixed that for you!

BlackTalos1

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Looks like decent evidence to me. You even prove you were not driving out at 1.05pm, but were somewhere else.

I think the ICO need to see this and I mean NOW, tonight, don't draft something over the 'next few days' - just do the complaint online tonight, show them the PCN and show them your phone location evidence and tell them you believe that this is negligent or fraudulent ANPR data massaging, proving that the time on the IN and OUT cameras are both wrong.

Confirm that you HAVE already complained/appealed to the trader, and they have rejected your dispute, hence why you want the ICO to look at the huge issue here which is not the only such ANPR timing 'error' case on parking forums right now...seems to be endemic.

And parking firms are pretending thousands of people have overstayed who have not, and profiting at £100 a pop from each victim.

Be REALLY ROBUST in the ICO complaint, and attach your evidence & the PCN and rejection email, and add as an aside that the trader ignored your clear request NOT to email the POPLA code, which is another less worrying concern, but a data handling issue nonetheless, because they've used an email address they were asked not to use for this purpose.

Don't worry that your data might not be right...why would it not be...let the ICO decide

The form is filled and the documents attached is complete.

I could do with some help on the robustness of this section:

What would you like the ICO to do to help?
eg ask the organisation to give you the information you asked for, ask the organisation to apologise, or give the organisation advice on how to improve

I have appealed to the trader but they have rejected my dispute, so I would like the ICO to help ensure that the Data they hold is correct.
I would also like the ICO to look into the inaccurate ANPR time readings and possible fraud for victims who might not hold the same data that I can produce on this occasion.
Additionally, as can be read in my attached response, I specifically requested written responses, in the same or similar postal format as the Parking Charge Notice. This was ignored by the organisation who responded by email with attachment that included the POPLA appeal code.