DCB Legal for UKCP acting like jerks

MrMoonsPointofview

patient_dream said:

MrMoonsPointofview said:

As requested: 

So, no rear of the car. ANPR can only work if entry and exit is shown

Correct on this occasion, because it is one way in and the same way out - and only one camera. Obviously if there had been multiple cameras and separate entry/exit points as on motorway service areas inter alia, then yes, depending where each camera is mounted, it may indeed be capturing the same side of the vehicle both times, but not on this poxy facility which has just one camera and one entry/exit. That indeed should have recorded a rear shot to at least produce a passing resemblance to something that was genuine. Of course, based on the other photo I uploaded, you see there are other problems as well when enforcement takes place during darkness.

Umkomaas

Of course, based on the other photo I uploaded, you see there are other problems as well when enforcement takes place during darkness.

Fairly standard fare I'm afraid at night with ANPR capture. Nothing to see (especially in the dark), move on!

MrMoonsPointofview

Umkomaas said:

I'd complain to the BPA and ask them how two forward facing vehicle shots can show entry and exit. 

sara.r@britishparking.co.uk

Just do it!

Aaaah!!! That reminds me - did I read somewhere on the stickies that there is a moratorium on the BPA CoP? Or did I misconstrue something. Thanks Umkomaas.

Umkomaas

MrMoonsPointofview said:

Umkomaas said:

I'd complain to the BPA and ask them how two forward facing vehicle shots can show entry and exit. 

sara.r@britishparking.co.uk

Just do it!

Aaaah!!! That reminds me - did I read somewhere on the stickies that there is a moratorium on the BPA CoP? Or did I misconstrue something. Thanks Umkomaas.

Misconstrued. Confused with the Govt's mandatory Code of Practice emanating from the Sir Greg Knight's private members bill aimed at bringing some sense into this out of control private parking sector. Other than a further consultation in a few weeks time - please contribute to it, essential if you've been scammed by a private parking company - nothing will happen for at least another 12 months or more on this!

MrMoonsPointofview

OK then.

Umkomaas, Keith, Coup & Patience (I think that's everyone?)

I thank each of you for helping me these past hours. I'm carrying on per your recommendations that don't seem to conflict with one another. As other things unfold in due course, or of I have any more questions, I'll come back to this thread.

Have yourselves a good night.

patient_dream

I think you will have fun with this one.  As you know, DCBL cases for UKPC get dafter and dafter every day. It's no wonder DCBL discontinue

fisherjim

In my experience some car parks do use a single camera for entry and exit shots Morrisons in High Wycombe and Branscombe in Devon are two straight off my head, I think it depends on the width of the entry exit point.

But no matter, those two ANPR images in my view are your evidence that you entered twice, they are obviously both front of the car shots on entry unless they are trying to say you reversed out, which would be daft.

We all know that ANPR is not fit for purpose for timing in car parks for a multitude of reasons and why authorities are banned from using it.

In this case it is clear that the system has failed as they do in hundreds if not thousands of cases (who knows) to have read the rear number plate on the two exits, obviously the reasons for this could be many, but that is their problem for using duff technology not yours, and I guarantee the signage will not say; "you will get a pcn for an unreadable plate"!

Trainerman

Can I just respectfully say to the OP that if you are going to write to MP and Legal bodies, you really need to sort this absolute howler - A 'Premise' is a proposition or argument'. The place that your car parked would be 'premises', even in the singular.

MrMoonsPointofview

Trainerman said:

Can I just respectfully say to the OP that if you are going to write to MP and Legal bodies, you really need to sort this absolute howler - A 'Premise' is a proposition or argument'. The place that your car parked would be 'premises', even in the singular.

Thank you. Yes I now realise what a solecism that was due to ignorance on my part - but don't worry, because I live in a constituency where the local MP can hardly sign his name! I kid you not. I've read his tripe!

MrMoonsPointofview

UPDATE: dialogue is being exchanged in profusion these past hours. In short, one woman is supplying a fish story (which includes refusing point blank to answer why she is claiming the second ENTRY shot is being billed as an "exit" despite being asked three times). She has finally got round to addressing the (now well known) fake £60 above the Notice to Keeper sum. There's nothing imaginative in light of the countless cases where abuse of process has been ruled, but I will continue to hold her feet to the fire for answers (so far every time she writes, it is a development of what the last communication said but a partial redress that inches them slightly closer to fulfilling the Practice Direction). But I have one question.

Amid the string of court findings that have thrown out the £60 fake charge, has there been one (or more) to have actually involved UKPC themselves as commander-in-chief? I know DCB has been at centre of one or two such as with Excel....