Private company issued fine on public road

ArthurMoose

My friend was parked on a public road in Hampshire on double yellow lines, displaying a blue badge (blue badge holders can park on double yellow lines for 3 hours if safe).
There was a private car park opposite, with warning signs on that land. She was given a parking ticket by the private company mentioned on the signs.
She rang the local authority to check that the road she parked in was a public road, which it was, and they said their own wardens are responsible for that road. They refused to get involved.
She appealed the ticket, but the so-called "independent" review panel rejected her appeal.
She is a vulnerable person, the parking company threatened her with court, so she paid the fine to avoid any more stress, which she has to do because it affects her epilepsy.
I think it's deplorable that the company has targeted a blue badge car in the first place, when they must have known they were in the wrong.
Is there any further redress for her? My understanding is that the private parking company industry is unregulated, which is also pretty apalling.

KeithP

Where exactly did that parking event take place?

ArthurMoose

It happened in Acorn Close in Winchester

Fruitcake

Which parking company?

Your friend should complain to to her MP and ask them to intervene.

Edit
It looks like it is UKCPM, and they appear to infest a private road/housing estate.

LDast

Acorn Close appears to be private land, at least from after the entrance to the college. There are inadequate signs sporadically along the road but are difficult to see and some are obscured by overgrowth. There are no signs to indicate to the driver that they are entering private land and that terms and conditions for parking apply. No contract could possibly have been formed between the driver and the PPC.

Which vermin operator is this?

Unfortunately, having paid it, your friend has thrown away good money. The only way  may be able to get something back is if it c an b e shown that they obtained her DVLA data unlawfully and she can then sue them for compensation and damages for breach of her GDPR under the Data Protection Act. Unfortunately, if she suffers from stress, this may not be what she wants to hear.

It would be a fun thing to do and rewarding if successful. Are you prepared to do this for your friend, in her name with you acting as a Lay Rep if they don’t comply?

To give you an idea on what basis you could  sue them, have a read of this:

Article 5(1)(d) of the UK GDPR legally requires data controllers to store and process personal data accurately. If a data controller, such as a private parking company, unlawfully obtains the keeper's data from the DVLA and issues an invoice based on inaccurate information, claiming you parked in breach of an alleged contract with the landowner (or their agent), this constitutes processing your personal data inaccurately and unlawfully under the UK GDPR.

The precedents for claiming damages and compensation for such unlawful processing of personal data can be found in cases like Halliday v Creation Consumer Finance Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 333, where the court awarded compensation for distress caused by the inaccurate processing of personal data under the Data Protection Act 1998. Although this case was decided under the old law, similar principles apply under the UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018. Under Article 82 of the UK GDPR and Section 168 of the Data Protection Act 2018, individuals have the right to compensation if they suffer material or non-material damage because of a breach of data protection laws.

Additionally, the case of Vidal-Hall v Google Inc [2015] EWCA Civ 311 confirmed that claimants could recover compensation for distress alone under the Data Protection Act 1998, a principle now similarly recognised under the GDPR. This means that even if you have not suffered tangible financial loss, you may still be entitled to compensation for distress caused by the unlawful processing of your data.

Moreover, in Tetragon Financial Group Limited v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2020] UKUT 0305 (TCC), the court reiterated the importance of accurate data handling by public bodies. This principle can be applied here, as the DVLA, a public body, must ensure that any data it provides to third parties, such as private parking companies, is used lawfully and accurately. If a private parking company unlawfully obtained your data from the DVLA and processed it inaccurately, you have grounds to seek compensation.

To seek compensation for the unlawful processing of your personal data, you should provide 21 days’ notice (the pre-action protocol typically requires 14 days, but a longer notice can show goodwill) to the data controller, in this case, the private parking company, of your intention to claim damages. You might claim, say £300 for nominal damages under Article 82 of the UK GDPR and Section 168 of the Data Protection Act 2018. This notice should clearly state that you will file a claim with the County Court if they do not confirm in writing that all references to this alleged debt have been deleted within 14 days. Be sure to mark your letter as a "Letter before County Court proceedings."

As a litigant-in-person, you can file your claim under Part 27 proceedings in the County Court (often referred to as the "Small Claims Court"). Each party is responsible for their own legal costs, regardless of the outcome, and the claim can be filed online for a fee of £35 via the Money Claim Online service (moneyclaimonline.gov.uk). The successful party can recover their court fees, making the total claim amount £335.

ArthurMoose

The company is called UK Car Park Management.
They've got 1.1 star review from 955 people on Google LOL

ArthurMoose

Thank you for the very helpful comments. My friend is going to email her MP as a first step. It's an area where regulation needs to be looked at, these companies are unscrupulous.

LDast

That's the problem with those reviews, you have to give them at least one star just to get the review published.

As mentioned, the problem here is that the PCN has been paid and you won't get them to pay it back unless you sue them in court. The only real way to get them in court is if it can be shown that they had no right to request the keepers DVLA data as they had no contract to operate at the location or breached their ATA Code of Practice (CoP) in which case they violated the KADOE contract with the DVLA. If that was the case, then the keepers data was obtained unlawfully.

However, GSV does show that there are some inadequate signs at the location but ou also have evidence from the council that refutes their clam that they have any contractual right to operate at that location.

Can yo show us the NtK that was received by your friend. Redact personal details but leave all location, dates and times showing.

ArthurMoose

Will try to post it tomorrow. Thank you.

Coupon-mad

ArthurMoose said:

Thank you for the very helpful comments. My friend is going to email her MP as a first step. It's an area where regulation needs to be looked at, these companies are unscrupulous.

But regulation is already happening.  It's been worked on by the now MHCLG since 2020.

The MP should be asked to step in and complain on her behalf but also to ask the Labour Government when exactly the new statutory CoP will be re-laid before Parliament to finalise the 2019 Act.