JD Parking / Euro Car Parks Parking Charge Notices

1505grandad

munaafg said:

1505grandad said:

There are several references to "Euro Car Parks"?

The POPLA appeal is against Euro Car Parks? 

Apologies saw JD Parking only

Coupon-mad

munaafg said:

5. Failure to comply with the data protection 'ICO Code of Practice' applicable to ANPR (no information about SAR rights, no privacy statement, no evaluation to justify that 24/7 ANPR enforcement at this site is justified, fair and proportionate). A serious BPA CoP breach 

BPA’s Code of Practice (22.4) states that:  

“It is also a condition of the Code that, if you receive and

process vehicle or registered keeper data, you must:

• be registered with the Information Commissioner

• keep to the Data Protection Act

• follow the DVLA requirements concerning the data

• follow the guidelines from the Information

Commissioner’s Office on the use of CCTV and

ANPR cameras, and on keeping and sharing personal

data such as vehicle registration marks”

The guidelines from the Information Commissioner’s Office that the BPA’s Code of  Practice (22.4) refers to is the CCTV Code of Practice found at:  

“This code also covers the use of camera related surveillance equipment  including:  

• Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR);”  

“the private sector is required to follow this code to meet its legal obligations  under the DPA. Any organization using cameras to process personal data should  follow the recommendations of this code.” 

“If you are already using a surveillance system, you should regularly evaluate  whether it is necessary and proportionate to continue using it.”  

“You should also take into account the nature of the problem you are seeking to  address; whether a surveillance system would be a justified and an effective  solution, whether better solutions exist, what effect its use may have on  individuals”  

“You should consider these matters objectively as part of an assessment of the  scheme’s impact on people’s privacy. The best way to do this is to conduct a  privacy impact assessment. The ICO has produced a ‘Conducting privacy impact  assessments code of practice’ that explains how to carry out a proper  assessment.”  

“If you are using or intend to use an ANPR system, it is important that you  undertake a privacy impact assessment to justify its use and show that its  introduction is proportionate and necessary.” 

“Example: A car park operator is looking at whether to use ANPR to enforce  parking restrictions. A privacy impact assessment is undertaken which identifies  how ANPR will address the problem, the privacy intrusions and the ways to  minimize these intrusions, such as information being automatically deleted when  a car that has not contravened the restrictions leaves a car park.”  

“Note:  

... in conducting a privacy impact assessment and an evaluation of proportionality  and necessity, you will be looking at concepts that would also impact upon  fairness under the first data protection principle. Private sector organisations  should therefore also consider these issues.”  

“A privacy impact assessment should look at the pressing need that the  surveillance system is intended to address and whether its proposed use has a  lawful basis and is justified, necessary and proportionate.”

The quotations above taken directly from the ICO’s CCTV Code of Practice state that  if Euro Car Parks Ltd wish to use ANPR cameras then they must undertake a privacy  impact assessment to justify its use and show that its introduction is  proportionate and necessary. It also states that Euro Car Parks Ltd must regularly  evaluate whether it is necessary and proportionate to continue using it.  

It therefore follows that I require Euro Car Parks Ltd to provide proof of regular privacy  impact assessments in order to comply with the ICO’s CCTV Code of Practice and  BPA’s Code of Practice. I also require the outcome of said privacy impact  assessments to show that its use has “a lawful basis and is justified, necessary  and proportionate”. 

The ICO’s CCTV Code of Practice goes on to state:  

“5.3 Staying in Control  

Once you have followed the guidance in this code and set up the surveillance  system, you need to ensure that it continues to comply with the DPA and the  code’s requirements in practice. You should:  

• tell people how they can make a subject access request, who it  should be sent to and what information needs to be supplied with their  request;”  

“7.6 Privacy Notices  

It is clear that these and similar devices present more difficult challenges in  relation to providing individuals with fair processing information, which is a  requirement under the first principle of the DPA. For example, it will be difficult to  ensure that an individual is fully informed of this information if the surveillance  system is airborne, on a person or, in the case of ANPR, not visible at ground  level or more prevalent then it may first appear.  

One of the main rights that a privacy notice helps deliver is an individual’s  right of subject access.” 

Euro Car Parks Ltd has not stated on their signage a Privacy Notice explaining the  keepers right to a Subject Access Request (SAR). In fact, Euro Car Parks Ltd has not  stated a Privacy Notice or any wording even suggesting the keepers right to a SAR on  any paperwork, NtK, reminder letter or rejection letter despite there being a Data  Protection heading on the back of the NtK. This is a mandatory requirement of the  ICO’s CCTV Code of Practice (5.3 and 7.6) which in turn is mandatory within the  BPA’s Code of Practice and a serious omission by any data processor using ANPR,  such that it makes the use of this registered keeper’s data unlawful.  

As such, given the omissions and breaches of the ICO’s CCTV Code of Practice, and  in turn the BPA’s Code of Practice that requires full ICO compliance as a matter of law,  POPLA will not be able to find that the PCN was properly given.

 

6. No Evidence of Period Parked – NtK does not meet PoFA2012 requirements 

Contrary to the mandatory provisions of the BPA Code of Practice, there is no record  to show that the vehicle was parked versus attempting to read the terms and  conditions before deciding against parking/entering into a contract.  

PoFA 2012 Schedule 4 paragraph 9 refers at numerous times to the “period of  parking”. Most notably, paragraph 9(2)(a) requires the NtK to:  

“specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of  parking to which the notice relates;”  

Euro Car Parks Ltd’s NtK simply claims that the vehicle “entered [St. Georges Retail Park - Leicester] at [22:25] and  departed at [23:06]”. At no stage does Euro Car Parks Ltd explicitly specify the “period of  parking to which the notice relates”, as required by POFA 2012. 

Moreover Euro Car Parks Ltd have not provided any pictures of the car parked in a bay, they are just using entrance and exit times. 

Euro Car Parks Ltd uses ANPR (while failing to comply with the data protection  'ICO Code of Practice' applicable to ANPR) to capture images of vehicles entering  and leaving the vast unbounded and unmarked area to calculate their length of stay. Any vehicle passing by will be captured by ANPR. Euro Car Parks Ltd, however, does  not provide any direct evidence of its alleged violation. It is not in the gift of Euro Car Parks Ltd to substitute “entry/exit” or “length of stay” in place of the POFA  requirement - “period of parking” - and hold the keeper liable as a result.  

By virtue of the nature of an ANPR system recording only entry and exit times, Euro Car Parks Ltd are not able to definitively state the period of parking. 

I require Euro Car Parks Ltd to provide evidence to show the vehicle in question was  parked on the date/time (for the duration claimed) and at the location stated in the NtK.

I require an explanation of the allegation and your evidence. You must include a close up actual photograph of the vehicle parked in the bay, not just the photos of the vehicle entering and exiting a carpark.

I therefore request that you consider my appeal and cancel this unfair parking charge notice due to the reasons mentioned above.

Yours sincerely

Remove the above which has no legs.

Change 'keeper' to 'hirer' such as in:

"I contend that I, as the keeper,"

munaafg

Does this mean I've won?  

The operator has contacted us and told us that they have withdrawn your appeal.
If you have already paid your parking charge, this is the reason your appeal will have been withdrawn. Unfortunately, you cannot pay your parking charge and appeal, which means that POPLA’s involvement in your appeal has ended. You will not be able to request a refund of the amount paid in order to resubmit your appeal to us.
If you have not paid your parking charge, the operator has reviewed your appeal and chosen to cancel the parking charge. As the operator has withdrawn your appeal, POPLA’s involvement has now ended and you do not need to take any further action.
Kind regards
POPLA Team

Coupon-mad

Yep - well done! Scam over.