Should I fight this PCN?

nosferatu1001

No, you do not need to send ANY form.
You have 30 days. 14 days was the old period.
Do not use a thread from 2013. The NEWBIES thread has up to date LBC advice, and has been around sicne then but has been repeatedly edited to be up to date.

I would also attach a copy of the letter you sent that named the driver, and highlight within it where the name and serviceable address was given, alongside the date. Reference this letter in the response to the scum, pointing out that their client has had since X date to contact the driver yet has chosen not to. This failure by their client is none of yoru concern, their harassment of you IS however of concern.

You shoudl also order them to cease processing your data; their need to process it ended as soon as the drivers name and address were given.

skins7789

Thank you so much for this!

Another question, though, please. What exactly is the processing of data (does this mean using it in some way, such as accessing addresses to send correspondence?), and what does it apply to? I was under the impression that it is only personal data, so is it possible to ask in a SAR for things like VRN / payment record information from a PD machine? Is that covered under GDPR?

waamo

Data is any data pertaining to you. They should delete all information about you. A complaint to the ICO is in order if they don't comply.

Don't worry about that for now. Get your rebuttal in and let's go from there.

skins7789

Ok. Thanks.

nosferatu1001

Youre not asking to get data from BW or the PPC, because you dont care right now

You need them to stop using your data - that means delete it, any records etc they have with your VRM, name, address etc.

skins7789

nosferatu1001, did you mean VRN? If so, does this mean the keeper can ask them to delete all records connected with the car, including the ANPR photos, PD ticket purchase, etc., as well as all prior communication with them? Even if they will need some of those records to to contact and deal with the driver? And if the keeper asks them to do this, do they have to under the 2018 legislation?

nosferatu1001

No, I mean VRM because that is the correct term.
Mark
Not Number
Because your VRM contains Numbers AND Letters

Yes, you require them to cease processing all personally identifiable data and confirm it has all been deleeted from your systesm

You have told them you will not identify the driver
The PURPOSE for which they get yoru data is to ask you who the driver is, OR hold you liable under POFA.
They cannot do the latter, and you have told them you will not say who the driver is. Thus, the PURPOSE for which they obtained the data has ENDED

Once they have no reason to process the data, they msut cease
YEs this comes under DPA2018 assuming it was post May 2018 (CBA to scrolll up... )

skins7789

Thanks. My mistake.

Actually, the keeper identified the driver in an email. So surely they need that email, as well as the photos, PD machine info, etc., to be able to write to the driver and conduct a case against that driver?

Also, the PCN was prior to May 2018, as was notification of who the driver was and notification from keeper to PPC to stop contacting them. Subsequent correspondence and LBC is more recent than May 2018. So do they need to follow 2018 GDPR rules, or 1998 Data Protection Act rules?

nosferatu1001

What case agaisnt the driver?

THey cannot continue to process your data in the hope that within 6 years they will find out the identity of the driver!

Certainly they should remove your address. THAT was obtained from the DVLA under express conditions, which are now exhausted.

Both, and for continuing to process data NOW they must be compliant with the DPA2018.

The_Deep

Preserving your identity is not so important as you might think. If it goes to court, and you have a copper bottomed case, unless you have an idiot for a judge, you will surely win. Judges are not fools, they are familiar with the mo of these companies.

The whole industry is a scam, relying on threats of court, and the public's ignorance of the Law, A bill is currently before parliament which will regulate the scammers, many of whom are ex-clampers.

This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of alleged contracts for alleged parking offences, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors. Is has been suggested by an MP that some of these companies may have connections to organised crime.

Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, (especially Smart}, and others have already been named and shamed in the House of Commons as have Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each week), hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned. They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

The problem has become so widespread that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers.

Sir Greg Knight's Private Members Bill to curb the excesses, and perhaps close down, some of these companies passed its Second Reading in the Lords this month, and, with a fair wind, will l become Law later this year..

All three readings are available to watch on the internet, (some 6-7 hours), and published in Hansard. MPs have an extremely low opinion of the industry. Many are complaining that they are becoming overwhelmed by complaints from members of the public. Add to their burden, complain in the most robust terms about the scammers.