Parking charge for passing through car park

Boudouche1

@fisherjim , I do not know if this is an authorised route (described nicely by @KeithP above). It was in fact my wife who was driving, and we use this shortcut regularly (the gate is closed from time to time, so we have to go around).

Half_way

The questions about access routes/easements/rights etc is somethig tat could be used for a strong complaint to the sports centre, who took on the parking company.

The heart of the issue is that the vehicle was not in the car park for the duration the agents of the sports centre state.

 They have put in place a system that is defective not fit for purpose and the data it records is not accurate or even anywhere near GDPR compliant .

 As such your personal data has been gathered and processed without any checks in place to ensure the acurracy of the data gatered and processed - Data acccuracy is a key component of GDPR  failing ensure the data is acurrate is a breach of GDPR/Data protection legislation even more so should such a breach put you in a situation that may cause harm - be that mental ( ie causes some stress, anxiety worry)  physical ( ie you end up wasting your valuable time in dealing with their inompetence) , finacial - that is it costs you money to resolve this, and so on.

I would respond to the Parking company with something like ( but not the same as its for an idea) this

Re Parking charge notice xxxxxx

 The vehicle was not in the car park for the duration you state, your systems are defective and it would appear that you are not carrying out any reasonable checks such as foot patrols to verrify the ANPR data gathered is accurate.

 As such you have processed my personal data witout just cause, and this pakring charge must be cancelled with immediate effect.

 You must also put in place on this site, a system to ensure the acuracy of the data, such as 24/7 manned foot patrols on the site

You are also required to report this breach of GDPR/Data protection to the information commisioners office (ICO) and i will also be submitting a report as well.

 I will be looking at taking this further and i expect some re-compense for this issue from either you or your principal.

 As a gesture of goowill I will be willing to accept the sum of £250 from either yourselves or your principal together with assurances that the ANPR system wll be removed until such a time that you can ensure its accuracy

Failiure to comply may result in further action being taken which could involve a court case, failiure to pay may resultion a CCJ being awarded against you/ the person responsible at your company which would severly impact your aility to obtain credit

And to the Sports Centre with something like ( but not the same as its for an idea) this

I was issued a parking charge notice, by your agents total parking solutions, an un regulated prvate parking company .

 As principal, and as a professional organisation I am sure you are aware that you are jointly and severally liable for the actions of your agents, and of any legal obligations and liabilities that  this places upon you.

The vehicle was not in the car park for the duration your agents state, their systems are defective and it would appear no reasonable checks such as foot patrols to verrify the ANPR data gathered is accurate.

 As such through your agents actions my personal data has been witout just cause, and this pakring charge must be cancelled with immediate effect.

 You must also put in place on this site, a system to ensure the acuracy of the data, such as 24/7 manned foot patrols on the site

You are also required to report this breach of GDPR/Data protection to the information commisioners office (ICO) and i will also be submitting a report as well.

 I will be looking at taking this further and i expect some re-compense for this issue from either you or your principal. As a gesture of goowill I will be willing to accept the sum of £250 from either yourselves or your principal together with assurances that the ANPR system wll be removed until such a time that you can ensure its accuracy

 

 

Coupon-mad

Boudouche1 said:

@fisherjim , I do not know if this is an authorised route (described nicely by @KeithP above). It was in fact my wife who was driving, 

In which case you certainly don't appeal as you said you were planning to, where you were planning to appeal as driver even though you weren't!

Appeal as keeper stating you were not driving and asking if TCP reckon their NTK is POFA compliant? Then add Keith's explanation of the route your wife took and state they need another camera and must treat this as both an appeal and a formal complaint, because you wish to escalate the complaint to the BPA.  Catching people who drive right through as a shortcut is not professional parking management and the BPA need to audit this site in person.

fisherjim

Boudouche1 said:

@fisherjim , I do not know if this is an authorised route (described nicely by @KeithP above). It was in fact my wife who was driving, and we use this shortcut regularly (the gate is closed from time to time, so we have to go around).

Two further points to also consider then:

1. If you do not know if this is an authorised route look at it from the other side of the coin there cannot be signage prohibiting it's use or access to the other venue.

1. If as you say the parking company has recently installed anpr cameras the BPA COP states that a bedding in period must be allowed with additional signage highlighting the fact, obviously this was not done.

19.10

Where there is a change in the terms and conditions that

materially affects the motorist then you must make these

terms and conditions clear on your signage. Where such
changes impose liability where none previously existed then
you must consider a transition to allow regular visitors to the
site to adjust and familiarise themselves with the changes.
Best practice would be the installation of additional/
temporary signage at the entrance and throughout the site
making it clear that new terms and conditions apply. This will
ensure such that regular visitors who may be familiar with
the previous terms become aware of the new ones.

Boudouche1

Thank you @KeithP, @Half_way and @Coupon-mad for your advice. I will follow your suggesion with regards to the wording of the letters to the parking company and sports centre, but I am slightly concerned about demanding money from them. Would it not irritate the parking company, rather than make them cancel the parking charge?

@fisherjim , I can see your point about the adjustment period. This new ANPR system would have caught many, many people off guard as they are simply not aware of it and use this road as a shortcut. How can I flag my thread for those in Swansea who are also affected by this unfair charge so that they can follow my case?

Half_way

The wording is only for an idea.
Ultimately the car was not in the car park.
It doesn't matter how it left, if it was airlifted out on a helicopter, dismantled by mischievous squirrels and then re assembled and so on, it doesn't matter.

What does matter is that they have systems in place that are not accurate, and they are using these to harras people using incorrect data, and the principal, ie sports centre/car park owner is liable for the actions of its agents.

You are not appealing anything, you are telling them this is unacceptable 

pustit

Parking Prankster would have said similar. I like it!

Boudouche1

@Half_way thank you. I like the idea about the car being dismantled by mischievous squirrels YOu are right about the key message, I will try to draft the letter(s) now

Fruitcake

It does not matter whether this was or wasn't an authorised route. That is none of the PPC's business. It may or may not be a matter of trespass but that's for the landowner to decide.

The issue is simply that the vehicle did not park nor did it stop, therefore the PPC had no right to obtain nor process the keeper's personal data.

As already advised, complain to the landowner and your MP. If that fails, appeal as keeper and include the complaints suggested plus a demand to have the charge cancelled. If that fails then complain to the BPA and ICO.

1505grandad

As above  -  and the "we have got the motorists back" DVLA only give out data to ppc's because:-

"Under KADOE:-

"B2. Purpose For Which Data Is Provided

B2.1. The DVLA shall provide each requested item of Data to the Customer

via the KADOE Service for the Reasonable Cause of enabling the

Customer to:

a) seek recovery of unpaid Parking Charges in accordance with the ATA

Code of Practice, and using the procedure in Schedule 4 of the

Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (as amended) (where the vehicle was

parked on private land in England or Wales on a particular date);

b) otherwise seek recovery from a driver of unpaid Parking Charges in

accordance with the ATA Code of Practice (where the vehicle was

parked on private land in Scotland or Northern Ireland by that driver on

a particular date, or where the Customer has chosen not to pursue, or is

not in a position to pursue the vehicle keeper by utilising conditions in

Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012) (as amended);

CoP States:-

"BPA Approved Operator Scheme

Code of Practice

Control and enforcement of parking on private land

and unregulated public car parks 

2.9 The Code and its appendices cover the operation of

parking on private, unregulated land." 

Also presumably the signs will state anpr is for parking not any other purpose."