Met Parking Fine - McDonalds

beamerguy

tatty123 said:

Hi guys, any advice what I shall do. I requested MET to send me my appeal letter. And they did, but it wasn't my appeal letter. It was someone's else. It seems like this is a breach of GDPR. They came back and said they were not going to report to ICO after reviewing it. Do you think i have anything against them for sending me someone's appeal letter? Should I include in my POPLA appeal to say that I can't trust how they are using anyone's data if such breach has been made? 

Very silly MET ?   Self reporting a breach of data use is not compulsory.  Your right is to complain to the ICO adding the comments "how many times have MET done this" ?
Also telling the ICO that MET are not going to report a data breach

Regarding POPLA, they must issue a code but that will be in conflict with the info MET have given to you

Regardless what happens, ensure you issue a complaint to the ICO

Le_Kirk

Agree with @beamerguy, it won't help with POPLA but you should report to ICO along the lines suggeted.

Coupon-mad

I would actually include a screenshot of the GDPR breach letter showing a partial name/address, and MET's reply saying they are not going to tell the ICO, to show POPLA what they did.  It is not an 'appeal point' as such but just because an extra point might be enough to make MET throw in the towel and not want it scrutinised.

Of course you need all the usual POPLA points too, and have you checked the PCN is POFA or not (I didn't read back)?

Please now make a real difference - A TASK FOR SEPTEMBER.

The Government is (this month only) consulting about a new statutory code of practice (CoP) and framework to rein in the rogue parking firms.  Read and comment on the draft CoP proposal and the enforcement framework consultation, and get everyone you know to do the same.

You will need to register to comment on the CoP and enter an occupation even if you are retired or a homemaker, but otherwise it is easy to navigate, and comment upon each section/subsection individually. You can save comments to edit later and or submit comments once you are happy with them.

https://standardsdevelopment.bsigroup.com/projects/2020-00193#/section

You do not need to register to comment on the enforcement framework which can be found here. It has a link on page 5 to make comments.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/913272/Code_Enforcement_Framework_consultation.pdf

At the very least, we say the parking charge level should be £50/£25 or higher level £70/£35, as per Council PCNs in E&W.  

And we say the added fake 'debt recovery' costs are just double counting the cost of letters, and MUST GO because that is unfair and illegal.

Please be heard.  You can bet the hundreds of PPCs will be commenting.

No apologies for repeating this vital 'call for action' to consumers, on every thread this month!

tatty123

Coupon-mad said:

I would actually include a screenshot of the GDPR breach letter showing a partial name/address, and MET's reply saying they are not going to tell the ICO, to show POPLA what they did.  It is not an 'appeal point' as such but just because an extra point might be enough to make MET throw in the towel and not want it scrutinised.

Of course you need all the usual POPLA points too, and have you checked the PCN is POFA or not (I didn't read back)?

Please now make a real difference - A TASK FOR SEPTEMBER.

The Government is (this month only) consulting about a new statutory code of practice (CoP) and framework to rein in the rogue parking firms.  Read and comment on the draft CoP proposal and the enforcement framework consultation, and get everyone you know to do the same.

You will need to register to comment on the CoP and enter an occupation even if you are retired or a homemaker, but otherwise it is easy to navigate, and comment upon each section/subsection individually. You can save comments to edit later and or submit comments once you are happy with them.

https://standardsdevelopment.bsigroup.com/projects/2020-00193#/section

You do not need to register to comment on the enforcement framework which can be found here. It has a link on page 5 to make comments.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/913272/Code_Enforcement_Framework_consultation.pdf

At the very least, we say the parking charge level should be £50/£25 or higher level £70/£35, as per Council PCNs in E&W.  

And we say the added fake 'debt recovery' costs are just double counting the cost of letters, and MUST GO because that is unfair and illegal.

Please be heard.  You can bet the hundreds of PPCs will be commenting.

No apologies for repeating this vital 'call for action' to consumers, on every thread this month!

Hi Coupon_mad, I'm not sure what you meant if the PCN is POFA? Are you asking about NTK? I think I cannnot use NTK cause it seems that I have read the conditions and they have met them. And the letter did arrive by the 14th day. 

I'm currently focusing on 3 points. 
1.     No evidence of Landowner Authority – The Operator is put to strict proof of full compliance with the BPA Code of Practice.

2.     The signage was inadequate so there was no valid contract formed

3.     Grace Period

tatty123

Hi, can I also argue that the sign states that it's 90 minutes max stay but there is no option to pay for the parking if you want to stay longer as it's a restaurant and there is a chance of overstaying in a restaurant especially a restaurant that advertised heavily as a place that welcomes family and friends and children to be at? 

Le_Kirk

tatty123 said:

Coupon-mad said:

I would actually include a screenshot of the GDPR breach letter .................

Hi Coupon_mad, I'm not sure what you meant if the PCN is POFA? Are you asking about NTK? I think I cannnot use NTK cause it seems that I have read the conditions and they have met them. And the letter did arrive by the 14th day. 

I'm currently focusing on 3 points. 
1.     No evidence of Landowner Authority – The Operator is put to strict proof of full compliance with the BPA Code of Practice.

2.     The signage was inadequate so there was no valid contract formed

3.     Grace Period

Look at the NTK and ask Auntie Google to show you the POFA and compare the wording and make sure that the NTK complies fully, word-for-word with the POFA.

Coupon-mad

tatty123 said:

Hi, can I also argue that the sign states that it's 90 minutes max stay but there is no option to pay for the parking if you want to stay longer as it's a restaurant and there is a chance of overstaying in a restaurant especially a restaurant that advertised heavily as a place that welcomes family and friends and children to be at? 

No, because the landowner has no obligation to allow parking for longer and that system isn't what they have introduced.

Please do the two important consultations first.    Think how threatened you currently feel, it's £100 for going to a restaurant, !!!!!!!  Get angry about that and reason to the two Government/BSI consultations even though it will take time to go through all the questions.  Make a difference!