LBCC - County Court Claim - Enterprise Parking Solutions

happych4ppy

Coupon-mad said:

Reply and ask for the 'guidance' they are relying upon and how exactly they intend to evidence their case?

I asked and they replied "The ICO has made it clear that all VRM data held by Car Park Operators with a DVLA KADOE license are not permitted to disseminate the data publicly. For more information please visit the ICO website."

They did not respond to my question about how they intend to evidence the case ...

Should I keep pressing?

D_P_Dance

Of course you should.

Coupon-mad

Yes.  The ICO saying PPCs are not allowed to 'disseminate the data publicly' simply means they are not allowed to put data about people/their cars on public view on their website or elsewhere.  "Publicly."

That is not to say they can't provide a machine log with VRMs partially redacted, as PPCs do all the time for POPLA/IAS appeals, and will certainly have to in evidence for court.

Otherwise they can't prove their case.

Press them again for disclosure of the machine logs, because they are now wilfully withholding evidence that the pre-action protocol requires to be shown to the Defendant.  Remind them that this is vital in order to narrow the issues and identify their payment and see if this is merely a matter of a close-match VRM that AOS members are required to find from early manual checks and not issue a PCN at all.

happych4ppy

Coupon-mad said:

Yes.  The ICO saying PPCs are not allowed to 'disseminate the data publicly' simply means they are not allowed to put data about people/their cars on public view on their website or elsewhere.  "Publicly."

That is not to say they can't provide a machine log with VRMs partially redacted, as PPCs do all the time for POPLA/IAS appeals, and will certainly have to in evidence for court.

Otherwise they can't prove their case.

Press them again for disclosure of the machine logs, because they are now wilfully withholding evidence that the pre-action protocol requires to be shown to the Defendant.  Remind them that this is vital in order to narrow the issues and identify their payment and see if this is merely a matter of a close-match VRM that AOS members are required to find from early manual checks and not issue a PCN at all.

Thanks for your help I've sent the reply, I'll keep you all posted

happych4ppy

Coupon-mad said:

Yes.  The ICO saying PPCs are not allowed to 'disseminate the data publicly' simply means they are not allowed to put data about people/their cars on public view on their website or elsewhere.  "Publicly."

That is not to say they can't provide a machine log with VRMs partially redacted, as PPCs do all the time for POPLA/IAS appeals, and will certainly have to in evidence for court.

Otherwise they can't prove their case.

Press them again for disclosure of the machine logs, because they are now wilfully withholding evidence that the pre-action protocol requires to be shown to the Defendant.  Remind them that this is vital in order to narrow the issues and identify their payment and see if this is merely a matter of a close-match VRM that AOS members are required to find from early manual checks and not issue a PCN at all.

Finally got a reply...

"I would like to advise, that recently Smart Parking Ltd have acquired Enterprise Parking Solutions – and therefore, I will now be continuing the Subject Access Request you have submitted.

I have looked through the below and I can confirm that through the platform Enterprise Parking Solutions utilise – they do not have a facility to track payments made and therefore, this cannot be provided to you.

Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can assist you further."


Also, it's been over a month since I submitted my defence statement... still haven't heard anything nor seen anything new on MCOL since my defence was "received on the 13/10/2021"

Any advice?

thanks

KeithP

I have looked through the below and I can confirm that through the platform Enterprise Parking Solutions utilise – they do not have a facility to track payments made and therefore, this cannot be provided to you.

Are they actually saying there that they have no evidence on whether or not any payment was made?

Coupon-mad

Yep, if they can't track payments, where is the evidence to support any allegation that any driver failed to pay?

Le_Kirk

happych4ppy said:

Coupon-mad said:

Yes.  The ICO saying PPCs are not allowed to 'disseminate the data publicly' simply means they are not allowed to put data about people/their cars on public view on their website or elsewhere.  "Publicly."

I have looked through the below and I can confirm that through the platform Enterprise Parking Solutions utilise – they do not have a facility to track payments made and therefore, this cannot be provided to you.

KeithP said:

I have looked through the below and I can confirm that through the platform Enterprise Parking Solutions utilise – they do not have a facility to track payments made and therefore, this cannot be provided to you.

Are they actually saying there that they have no evidence on whether or not any payment was made?

Coupon-mad said:

Yep, if they can't track payments, where is the evidence to support any allegation that any driver failed to pay?

Talk about shooting themselves in the foot!

happych4ppy

Le_Kirk said:

happych4ppy said:

Coupon-mad said:

Yes.  The ICO saying PPCs are not allowed to 'disseminate the data publicly' simply means they are not allowed to put data about people/their cars on public view on their website or elsewhere.  "Publicly."

I have looked through the below and I can confirm that through the platform Enterprise Parking Solutions utilise – they do not have a facility to track payments made and therefore, this cannot be provided to you.

KeithP said:

I have looked through the below and I can confirm that through the platform Enterprise Parking Solutions utilise – they do not have a facility to track payments made and therefore, this cannot be provided to you.

Are they actually saying there that they have no evidence on whether or not any payment was made?

Coupon-mad said:

Yep, if they can't track payments, where is the evidence to support any allegation that any driver failed to pay?

Talk about shooting themselves in the foot!

Thanks for all you replies.

Should I reply to the Subject Access Request asking how the intend to evidence the case? is that an appropriate question? or should I just leave it now that they have shown their hand?

Also, I finally got the DQ today. Do I just fill it out as normal according to the instructions listed here? https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/71763411#Comment_71763411

Thanks

Le_Kirk

Follow the instructions that you have found in your link or the one linked from the Defence Template or NEWBIE sticky; all still current advice: -
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5546325/court-claim-procedure-updated-october-2016/p1