Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Handles Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 11:39
Post #1357231

I stopped at MOTO Wetherby services on my way up to Newcastle one morning in January, stayed for about twenty minutes/half an hour. On the same day I traveled back from Newcastle and stopped at the same services in the afternoon, again staying 20/30 minutes.

A few weeks later I got a PCN in the post having me clocked into the services in the morning and out in the afternoon, showing me to have stayed 6 hours or so, despite this being two separate visits. They have a 2 hour parking policy so I incurred a PCN.

I responded using the online appeal form stating what had happened and have just received the following response:

"In light of your claims, we have considered your representations and are prepared to reconsider the status of this Notice should we receive evidence of your claim, such as copies of vehicle tracker reports or similar. However, until such time as this evidence is received this Notice will continue to remain outstanding."

My issue is I don't have this kind of tracking information. I've checked Google Analytics and there is no location tracking information for the journey, although I did use google maps for the journey.

My question is, should this be on me to prove? What should be my next step? Should I challenge them to show my car in the carpark for the duration on CCTV?

Thanks.

Posted by: ManxRed Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 13:11
Post #1357282

The onus is on them to prove it, but sadly they'll trot out their clearly inaccurate evidence and try to present it as fact.

You can provide counter evidence, it doesn't need to be a tracker. Were you with anyone? Did you visit anyone in Newcastle? They can provide witness statements that would be perfectly acceptable by a court to evidence you elsewhere. Did you buy anything in Newcastle? Got the receipt? Got a bank statement with any transactions?
That would do.

Posted by: s360 Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 13:23
Post #1357287

Post up the notice with personal info redacted. What date was the incident and when did you receive the notice? Does google maps not show you travelling at the time in question? Anyway its up to them ultimately to show that you were there for the 6 hours. I imagine you would be able to produce witness statements to evidence you were elsewhere at the time in question. Double dips are a well known problem with ANPR.
I would respond with something along the lines of this:
Further to your reply i do not take kindly to having my integrity questioned. Double dips are a well known problem with ANPR systems. Consultation of your ANPR records will clearly show my vehicle leaving and returning later that day, spending no more than 20/30 minutes on site each time. It is not for me to prove anything, that responsibility lies solely with you. You will therefore cancel this charge and are to treat this as a request under section 10 of the DPA to stop processing and remove my details as you have no cause in which to continue to hold them. Further contact other then to confirm cancellation will be considered harassment.

Although i would maybe hold off on the response until you post up the ntk as that may yield some more info that can be used with your reply.

Posted by: bearclaw Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 13:33
Post #1357293

You can see the camera pole here - the short one between the two lampposts

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.944191,-1.3714238,3a,75y,119.62h,84.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5u3lnKuwHbPQO50-KyMECg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

It's very common to drive up behind a wagon like that one that goes slowly as it goes uphill from the filling station - the end result is that the camera is so short it simply cannot see your car and you get a double dip. It's trivially easy to prove that this is going to be why they seem to get a lot of double dips here.

CP plus also insist on payment for cars being by mobile phone only - I assisted someone who was broken down in the car park and decided quite honourably to pay even though it wasnt necessary and if you don't have a mobile you cannot pay cash. not sure if thats any help attacking the charge though.

Posted by: Jlc Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 14:03
Post #1357307

CP+ right?

They aren't particularly litigious but best to deal with it now. They are doubting your integrity and show their desperation for cash.

Their camera system won't have video, just snaps of entries and exits - and more importantly no record of the 'missed' ones. Your word should be sufficient but if you can provide anything to show you are reasonable would be good.

Posted by: Handles Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 14:23
Post #1357321

Thanks for your responses.

I don't have the PCN with me but I will upload it later/tomorrow.

I do have witnesses in Newcastle - they are a client of the company I work for, however, and I'd rather not bother them with it. I was visiting a construction site so they will have the sign in records, getting hold of these might be a bit of a pain. I would probably include in a response that these exist, but aren't easily accessible.

I did buy a McDonalds before leaving Newcastle - I don't have the receipt, but I paid on my credit card so will have a record of the transaction (though not the time).

Google does not have location tracking data for my use of maps (not sure why not), but it does have logging information for activities on my phones Map app - i.e. 7.07am directions to Newcastle from current location, 1.09pm directions to home from current location - it doesn't say where i was when accessing this though.

Posted by: ManxRed Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 14:27
Post #1357323

So, you can provide sufficient evidence that you were, on the balance of probabilities, elsewhere at the time. Tell them that, and state the evidence available to you (sign in logs, witness statements, credit card transactions elsewhere).

Add a sentence to that effect within s360's suggested letter above and send it back.

Posted by: Redivi Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 14:27
Post #1357324

S360 has summarised the situation

As a result of an ANPR error, CP+ accessed your details at the DVLA without reasonable cause

Instead of accepting their mistake they've compounded it by calling you a liar

How far you want to go is up to you but here are some options that are not mutually exclusive :

1 Tell CP+ that their response is insulting. You will not provide the evidence they've demanded other than to POPLA where they can pay to see it
2 Complaint to DVLA that CP+ double-dipped and refused to correct their mistake
3 Complaint to BPA along similar lines
4 Complaint to Information Commissioners Office about the access to your information without reasonable cause
5 Letter Before Claim demanding £100-£300 for the distress and inconvenience arising from their unlawful action and the response when the error was brought to their attention

Posted by: ManxRed Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 14:31
Post #1357328

I agree with all of this, apart from 4, where they probably had a reasonably held belief that they had reasonable cause at the time they accessed the data. However, what they don't have, now that you've told them it was a double dip, is the right to continue to use that data. Hence a complaint to the ICO would be for their continued processing of that data after they were told that they had no reasonable cause.

Posted by: Redivi Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 14:52
Post #1357339

Yes

The ICO has a very high barrier

I've never had a complaint upheld even when the parking company and its debt collectors are chasing somebody that they know to have no liability

As an aside, a senior person at the BPA told me face-to-face that, in their view, there is nothing wrong with such behaviour

Posted by: bearclaw Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 14:56
Post #1357340

Their camera system "should" show the second entry as thats a rear plate camera (same pole) and its rare to have a wagon that close it's obscured. Of course they will probably claim it's not on the system even though it will be and is proof that a double dip occured.

There is CCTV in the car park - if you want a giggle you could write to the services and ask them who controls it (since there is no signage as I recall) and require them to retain footage in anticipation of a court case in the next six years.....

That was enough to kick CP+ into cancelling the ticket a couple of years back.



You can get the transaction time from the card provider with a little work. The fact that you have business there and a receipt on your card statement though will be sufficient should it come to court, which this shouldn't even get near.

Posted by: cabbyman Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 19:48
Post #1357466

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/how-parking-operators-use-anpr.html