I visited the car park twice and was fined from first entry to last exit

rdr

I think it all comes down to how you handle unpaired entries/exits and whether your system works on separate entry and exit lists or just one passing the entrance list.
One day when I'm bored and actually work out the various probabilities.

Fruitcake

It is my personal belief that the code is writ such that where two or more visits occur, the subsequent exits and entries are deliberately discarded.
This is in addition to VRM misreads, and failed VRM captures due to obstructions such as other vehicles.

An SAR should always be sent to the PPC where a double dip occurs, demanding all four (or more) images of the vehicle in question, then complaints to the ICO and DVLA when they are not provided, along with a complaint to the keeper's MP etcetera and the landowner.

elsien

I'm currently waiting to see if a ticket arrives for this.
Day 1 - visit hospital, can't park, leave site, park elsewhere and walk back.
Day 2. Visit hospital, manage to park, go to pay and the machine tries to charge me for 24 hours.
Decline their kind offer and pay for the 2 hours I actually had.
Sit and wait for ticket to arrive. 

Umkomaas

While this looks a classic 'double dip' scenario, please check that there isn't a silly 'No Return Within xx Hours' condition that you might have unknowingly fallen foul of. 

Just to be sure of your ground. 

Half_way

Umkomaas said:

While this looks a classic 'double dip' scenario, please check that there isn't a silly 'No Return Within xx Hours' condition that you might have unknowingly fallen foul of. 

Just to be sure of your ground. 

This and then go for the landowner/car park owner .

 whos car park was this and where?

95Rollers

Fruitcake said:

It is my personal belief that the code is writ such that where two or more visits occur, the subsequent exits and entries are deliberately discarded.
This is in addition to VRM misreads, and failed VRM captures due to obstructions such as other vehicles.

An SAR should always be sent to the PPC where a double dip occurs, demanding all four (or more) images of the vehicle in question, then complaints to the ICO and DVLA when they are not provided, along with a complaint to the keeper's MP etcetera and the landowner.

This is where I'm at with my case against OPS.  I was double dipped whilst leaving and coming back with a first and last entry 23 mins apart.  I sent a SAR to them requesting the ANPR log - BUT they said they won't give it to me because it "contains other people's data" so I suggested a Redacted copy - buy wasn't going to argue anymore on it if they refuse. I have enclosed a copy of my Emaile to them documenting this in the Witness statement. But cheekily they said if I could provide evidence of my whereabouts in that material time frame then I should (surely this would include "other people's details").  I am included the Email trail as an Exhibit so the court can see their refusal. There will definitely be an ICO complaint on them refusing my Data!  

Anyway back on topic - wait and see what happens within the relevabt PoFA times - Don't initiate any contact unless you hear from them first and follow advice on here regarding a SAR.  If they don't supply this in the SAR as in my case- demand to know why!  Only communicate via Email so there is an audit trail of evidence. 

D_P_Dance

In my opinion,  any PPC   would be bonkers to take a double dip, tp court.   Even if the appellant cannot prove that they wre elsewhere dutring the interregnum, (and why should they), a  judge must surely find that. OTBOP, they were not there.  The indequacies of ANPR are well documented.

davidjchamberlain

Half_way said:

Umkomaas said:

While this looks a classic 'double dip' scenario, please check that there isn't a silly 'No Return Within xx Hours' condition that you might have unknowingly fallen foul of. 

Just to be sure of your ground. 

This and then go for the landowner/car park owner .

 whos car park was this and where?

Proudfoots in Scalby, Scarborough - but they arent the issue it was the operator- Anyone who knows them they are a fantastic local chain - I cannot stress enough they couldnt have been more helpful,  - the guy I spoke to was mortified and explained they only had the system installed because people had used the car park as a park and ride in a seaside resort so I understand why they have it - they quashed it for me immediately after I spoke with them

davidjchamberlain

comeandgo said:

Yup, it’s a common complaint with multiple visits.  Regarding your lease company, its in the terms and conditions you signed when taking out the lease.  My leasing company used to pay the companies and then charge me for doing so.

leasing company stopped the charge when i called an explained - Volvo/Santander - very helpful - but it was an inconvenience

patient_dream

davidjchamberlain said:

Half_way said:

Umkomaas said:

While this looks a classic 'double dip' scenario, please check that there isn't a silly 'No Return Within xx Hours' condition that you might have unknowingly fallen foul of. 

Just to be sure of your ground. 

This and then go for the landowner/car park owner .

 whos car park was this and where?

Proudfoots in Scalby, Scarborough - but they arent the issue it was the operator- Anyone who knows them they are a fantastic local chain - I cannot stress enough they couldnt have been more helpful,  - the guy I spoke to was mortified and explained they only had the system installed because people had used the car park as a park and ride in a seaside resort so I understand why they have it - they quashed it for me immediately after I spoke with them

Well done .. PLAN A scuppers a scammer again.

We all understand the problems.  Proudfoots should have done research on CEL first, the internet is full of the CEL rubbish.  If they don't get rid of CEL quickly, they will lose customers

Hope you have this in writing

And as a thank you to Proudfoots, send them this link

CEL turn up to court. 50 cases of ticketing their own customer's employees.  THE CO-OP

https://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2015/01/cel-turn-up-to-court-50-cases-of.html

Could be Proudfoots next