Breach of KADOE complaint to DVLA

Fruitcake

Have a look at what the IPC said in this tweet.

The International Parking Community (IPC) on Twitter: "@_TheIPC's mantra is that no motorist should be marginalised - or humiliated! (See news article below) @_TheIPC's award nominated "Get Your Reg Right" campaign urges the manufacture of #typoproof #parking payment systems as a moral duty. #mondaythoughts https://t.co/izGqyc1wO0 https://t.co/ztH9lbYpX2" / Twitter

@_TheIPC's mantra is that no motorist should be marginalised - or humiliated! (See news article below)
@_TheIPC's award nominated "Get Your Reg Right" campaign urges the manufacture of #typoproof #parking payment systems as a moral duty.

The IPC have said it is a moral duty for PPCs to have typo proof PDT machines, so why are they issuing PCNs when their own equipment is inadequate?

It's almost as if PPCs want motorists to make mistakes so they can be unfairly fleeced.

jabfish

Fruitcake said:

............

The IPC have said it is a moral duty for PPCs to have typo proof PDT machines, so why are they issuing PCNs when their own equipment is inadequate?

It's almost as if PPCs want motorists to make mistakes so they can be unfairly fleeced.

Very interesting - thanks.  I've owned the car for 3 years and know the VRN off by heart.  I'm always accurate with stuff like this (military background!) so I'm very confident there was fault with machine rather than a typo.

jabfish

So PPC have provided a redacted list of 80 vehicle reg's captured on the same day. Four (including mine) were captured incorrectly. 

As I suspected, this isn't a typo but an issue with the machine as they only captured the first 4 characters of my 7 character VRN.  They captured the 4 characters correctly but no idea why last 3 are completely missing!  Obviously I would not just partially enter my VRN. The other 3 erroneous VRNs only had 1 character captured at all for each!!

They have ironically called this evidence "to show machines were in working order"!

I'm not quite sure what step to take next as I'm unable to evidence that I did not type a partial VRN.  

Coupon-mad

The burden in court will be theirs to prove, and as you say, all they've proved is a 5% error rate where none of those four VRMs can possibly have been driver error.

No-one would enter one digit and your military background means you would never have entered a partial numberplate. Your eye for detail and full knowledge of your nunberplate wouldn't have let you type that.  This is clearly a pattern, an inherent and recurring fault of the machine and not driver error, oversight nor breach of any relevant contract or obligation.

D_P_Dance

Have you seen this?

https://metro.co.uk/2021/10/18/surrey-writing-on-womans-jumper-landed-couple-with-fine-when-she-walked-in-bus-lane-15439916/

jabfish

Coupon-mad said:

The burden in court will be theirs to prove, and as you say, all they've proved is a 5% error rate where none of those four VRMs can possibly have been driver error.

No-one would enter one digit and your military background means you would never have entered a partial numberplate. Your eye for detail and full knowledge of your nunberplate wouldn't have let you type that.  This is clearly a pattern, an inherent and recurring fault of the machine and not driver error, oversight nor breach of any relevant contract or obligation.

Great points, thank you very much (again!).  

It's completely outrageous that their Charge was due to "no trace of payment" and yet there is very clear trace of payment.  Frustrating to have to waste so much time on this but I will be fighting it all the way.

jabfish

D_P_Dance said:

Have you seen this?

https://metro.co.uk/2021/10/18/surrey-writing-on-womans-jumper-landed-couple-with-fine-when-she-walked-in-bus-lane-15439916/

 
 Ridiculous!  At least the council listened to the appeal properly....

Coupon-mad

jabfish said:

Coupon-mad said:

The burden in court will be theirs to prove, and as you say, all they've proved is a 5% error rate where none of those four VRMs can possibly have been driver error.

No-one would enter one digit and your military background means you would never have entered a partial numberplate. Your eye for detail and full knowledge of your nunberplate wouldn't have let you type that.  This is clearly a pattern, an inherent and recurring fault of the machine and not driver error, oversight nor breach of any relevant contract or obligation.

Great points, thank you very much (again!).  

It's completely outrageous that their Charge was due to "no trace of payment" and yet there is very clear trace of payment.  Frustrating to have to waste so much time on this but I will be fighting it all the way.

Point your observations out now in a reply to that evidence.  Clearly they have no cause of action and if they'd bothered with manual 'human checks' of the automated list of payments (as the DPA 2018 requires when data relied upon is entirely automated) they could have attributed that fee to your car in one minute flat, as you were able to do.

jabfish

Coupon-mad said:

Point your observations out now in a reply to that evidence.  Clearly they have no cause of action and if they'd bothered with manual 'human checks' of the automated list of payments (as the DPA 2018 requires when data relied upon is entirely automated) they could have attributed that fee to your car in one minute flat, as you were able to do.

Yes, will do.  Useful to know what you've mentioned about DPA 2018 - I will research further and certainly use that. 

Thanks very much Coupon-mad!  I've no idea who you are but can't express how grateful I am for your advice!

Redx

The DPA was incorporated into the GDPR law 3 years ago

The DPA was also law before 2018 , but GDPR beefed it up

So when talking about data protection , DPA and GDPR are used a lot