Double dipping PCN, Civil Enforcement Ltd. - Claim form received

Half_way

This the place?

https://altrinchamretailpark.co.uk/info/

they appear to have a silly no return within an hour ( not sure if that's enforceable if the drivers are different)

However with Double dips there shgould be a zero tolerance on the PPCs and landowners, in this case altrincham retail park

The retail park owners will be jointly liable for the actions of their agents, the parking company.

 You need to get in touch with the retail park and tell them what has happened, remind them they are jointly liable for the actions of their agents .

 You need to tell them that, as far as you are concerned this is a breach of GDPR that the managemetn of the retail park are liable for as a result of their agents actions.

 

You also need to tell them that they must discontinue the court case that they, through the actions of their agents are progressing with and so far have issued court papers - this action can be called off at anytime up to the hearing and they are responsible for this.

You should also say that as far as you are concerned they are in breach of Data protection legislation/GDPR as they are using a system (ANPR) with no apparent checks on the accuracy of the data.

Data Accuracy is a key component of Data protection legislation .

The principal ( altrincham retail park) is jointly and severally liable for the actions of its agents ( Civil enforcement limited)

Directors/company representative/officials can be held personally liable for any GDPR breaches

trivialgale

Hi Ed, thanks for the response. The first link you sent is the post i was referring to which doesn't have much in to go off unfortunately. The cases mention in there tail off or go cold and there isn't any mention of a defence for double dipping in there. 

The second link is useful though as I didn't actually park on the first visit to the car park and so I might mention that in my defence.

Excellent Coupon-mad! Thanks for the response and amazing work on the DLUHC code of practice! I've mentioned the double dip section as well as the British parking associations code of practice on using ANPR. I'm not sure if I have the right idea regarding the way the defence is supposed to be written, I've been adding points to my defence and I think it reads ok but i'm not sure if it will make any sense to a judge? I've copied some of my redacted statement below. For some reason I can't attach files yet.

I might be asking my partener to provide a witness statement to backup my story and whereabouts on the day, do I need to mention this in my defence statement at all or is this something that can be submitted later on?

Many thanks for all of your quick and detailed responses!

3. On the [date], the defendant visited the car park [car park address] entering the car park at
[time of first entrance to car park]. The purpose of the visit was to pick up the defendant’s
partner from the car park after [reason for visit to car park]. The defendant’s vehicle,
registration [registration], was in the car park for no longer than approximately 10 minutes.
The defendant and his partner drove to their home [address] arriving home at [time of first
doorbell driveway picture]. The defendant’s vehicle remained on the driveway of his home
until [time of second doorbell pic] when the defendant drove his partner to [car park address]
so she could [reason for return visit]. This was the second time the defendant’s vehicle
entered the car park on [date]. The defendant’s vehicle left [car park] at [time of second exit]
on the same day. The defendant’s video doorbell captured images of the defendant’s vehicle
on his driveway at [first timestamp] and [second timestamp] on the [date].

Do I need to add any more here? Laws I’ll be relying on? Cases etc?

4. The defendant was issued a PCN from the claimant claiming the defendant’s vehicle,
registration [registration], had overstayed the 3 hour limit at [car park address]. The claimant
provided an image of the defendant’s car entering the car park on the first visit at [time of
first entrance to car park] and exiting on the second visit to the car park at [second exit]. The
claimant’s automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) cameras failed to register the
defendant’s car exiting the car park on the first visit and entering the car park on the second
visit. This resulted in a case of so called 'double dipping' as described in the government’s
private parking code of practice. Specifically, section 7.3 note 1. defines double dipping as
instances “where image camera systems might have failed to accurately record each instance
when a vehicle enters and leaves controlled land”. The defendant’s images provide evidence
that in this instance double dipping has occurred.

5. Given that the claimant’s ANPR system failed to fully register the defendant’s visits to the
car park, the ANPR system is inaccurate and unfit for purpose. This breaches the guidance in
the governments private parking code of practice as the data collected is not consistent or
accurate concerning the movements of the defendant’s vehicle. The parking code states “In
particular parking operators must make sure the data they are collecting is accurate,
securely held and cannot be tampered with.” The CoP also states “Parking operators must
ensure that the equipment and systems used to capture photographic evidence in respect of
controlled land are fit for purpose”.

6.  In addition to the DLUHC parking CoP, the British Parking Association (BPA) Approved Operator Scheme Code of Practice, which can be found here: https://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/AOS/AOS_Code_of_Practice_January_2020_v8(2).pdf, states guidelines for it’s members regarding the use of ANPR technology. Section 22 ANPR states “You may use ANPR camera technology to manage, control and enforce parking in private car parks, as long as you do this in a reasonable, consistent and transparent manner.”  It also states “You must keep any ANPR equipment you use in your car parks in good working order. You need to make sure the data you are collecting is accurate, securely held and cannot be tampered with.” As the claimant is a certified member of the BPA, these guidelines must be adhered to in order to prevent cases of double dipping from occurring. Clearly the evidence provided shows the claimant has breached these guidelines by failing to collect accurate and consistent data.

trivialgale

Half_way said:

This the place?

https://altrinchamretailpark.co.uk/info/

they appear to have a silly no return within an hour ( not sure if that's enforceable if the drivers are different)

However with Double dips there shgould be a zero tolerance on the PPCs and landowners, in this case altrincham retail park

The retail park owners will be jointly liable for the actions of their agents, the parking company.

 You need to get in touch with the retail park and tell them what has happened, remind them they are jointly liable for the actions of their agents .

 You need to tell them that, as far as you are concerned this is a breach of GDPR that the managemetn of the retail park are liable for as a result of their agents actions.

 

You also need to tell them that they must discontinue the court case that they, through the actions of their agents are progressing with and so far have issued court papers - this action can be called off at anytime up to the hearing and they are responsible for this.

You should also say that as far as you are concerned they are in breach of Data protection legislation/GDPR as they are using a system (ANPR) with no apparent checks on the accuracy of the data.

Data Accuracy is a key component of Data protection legislation .

The principal ( altrincham retail park) is jointly and severally liable for the actions of its agents ( Civil enforcement limited)

Directors/company representative/officials can be held personally liable for any GDPR breaches

Hi Half_way, that isn't the place, must be the one close by. It is a no return within 2 hour policy for the car park in question.

I will be writing a letter using that language tomorrow. Thank you very much! It would be amazing if this was cancelled!

Coupon-mad

That defence looks fine.

Double dip with doorbell camera evidence!  Evidence comes later of course, but:

You cannot lose and should send the solicitors your doorbell evidence in January (after defending of course, which is the top priority) and tell them to give their client's and their own heads a wobble and discontinue this claim immediately.

trivialgale

Hi all,

I want to provide an update for those interested.

I submitted my defence on 3rd Jan to CCBAQ@justice.go.uk and also CC'd in DCB Legal. I received an acknowledgement email from CCBCAQ and a letter from the County Court Business Centre acknowledging receipt of my defence. I also received an offer to settle from DCB Legal which I ignored. I sent a separate email to DCB Legal with my doorbell evidence showing that my car was not in the car park and was on my driveway and urged them to discontinue the claim. I never received a response.

I am aware the claimant had 28 days to contact the court after receiving a copy of my defence and after the that the claim will be stayed.I am wondering now is there anyway of knowing the current status of this claim?

Many thanks!

KeithP

You should've received a letter from the CCBC telling you they had sent a copy of your Defence to the Claimant and that the Claimant has twenty eight days to consider your Defence.

What you don't know is when the CCBC sent a copy of your Defence to the Claimant. 

It follows from that that it is not known when the Claimant has to respond to the CCBC. 

Further, we don't know what delays there are in the CCBC that means they don't send you a Directions Questionnaire as promptly as you might like.

Can I suggest that you keep checking your MCOL Claim History and as soon as you see that the CCBC has sent a DQ to you, you are ready to download a DQ, complete it and fire it back at the CCBC, remembering to send a copy to the Claimant of course?

trivialgale

KeithP said:

You should've received a letter from the CCBC telling you they had sent a copy of your Defence to the Claimant and that the Claimant has twenty eight days to consider your Defence.

What you don't know is when the CCBC sent a copy of your Defence to the Claimant. 

It follows from that that it is not known when the Claimant has to respond to the CCBC. 

Further, we don't know what delays there are in the CCBC that means they don't send you a Directions Questionnaire as promptly as you might like.

Can I suggest that you keep checking your MCOL Claim History and as soon as you see that the CCBC has sent a DQ to you, you are ready to download a DQ, complete it and fire it back at the CCBC, remembering to send a copy to the Claimant of course?

Thanks for replying so quickly KeithP.

I have received a letter from the CCBC telling me they received my defence and that a copy is being served on the claimant. That was received on 4th January.

I've checked my MCOL account and the latest event was on the 4th Jan that they had received my defence. I'll keep checking every few days.

Many thanks

bexr100

@trivialgale heya - what happened with your case in the end?

trivialgale

@bexr100 Hello! I’ve just checked my money claim online account and the latest update on 04/01/2023 was my defence was received. Everything else hasn’t changed but I’m assuming that’s all done with fingers crossed. 

Coupon-mad

trivialgale said:

@bexr100 Hello! I’ve just checked my money claim online account and the latest update on 04/01/2023 was my defence was received. Everything else hasn’t changed but I’m assuming that’s all done with fingers crossed. 

Doesn't work like that. It's still live and can be reopened at any time.

You will need to tell the CCBC and Claimant/solicitor if you move house in the future. This is important.