Jump to content

AngryFromSidcup

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    6
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About AngryFromSidcup

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Her appeal covers the grace period. I was merely pointing out the saucy gits attempting to obtain her passport & driving licence.
  2. Agreed. The saucy gets trying to bully her into sending passport or driving licence as proof of ID really has annoyed me, but her response what if i'd have used thefuturemsbeiber @ made me chuckle its bang on.
  3. The grace period is a Minimum of 10 Minutes, leaving within the 10th minute is acceptable
  4. 1 Date of the infringement 27/10/2018 2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 30/10/2018 3 Date received Unsure but within 10 days 4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [y/n?] No 5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes 6 Have you appealed? Yes using a few templates and adjusting Dear Sir/Madam, Re: Parking Charge Notice No: 0 ********** Vehicle Registration: ********* Issue Date: 27 October 2018 Entered Car Park: 27/10/18 @ 13:04:50 hrs Exited Car Park: 27/10/18 @14:45:47 hrs I am writing as the rather puzzled and annoyed keeper of the above vehicle after receiving your parking invoice, impersonating a parking ticket (Notice to Keeper - ref: 0 0**********). Please note that I refuse to pay your demands and decline your invitation to name the driver, neither of which are required of me as the keeper of the vehicle. All liability to your company is profusely denied. The amount you have demanded is not a genuine tariff/fee for parking nor is it based upon any genuine pre-estimate of loss to your company or the land owner. You are not the land owner and do not have the standing to offer contracts to drivers nor to bring a claim in your own right. Therefore I do not feel that I am liable for this charge on these grounds alone and those that follow. The penalty you are trying to impose on me as the keeper of this car is totally unjustified and there is sufficient evidence (see attached till receipt) to show that the driver at that time was in fact a customer of Lidl and has a witness who is also willing to testify to this. The driver (Lidl customer) did not overstay the parking time, neither did they park illegally, or cause a nuisance or obstruction by parking in the free car park whilst they shopped in Lidl supermarket. The receipt was scanned at the end of the shop as the driver (Lidl customer) was also prompted to do so by the young lady on the check out. The Code of Practice states that the “ticket” will indicate that the operator believes you have contravened the terms and conditions of the car park and if the operator is a member of an accredited trade association such as the British Parking Association (BPA) or the International Parking Committee (IPC), the ticket should give reasons for the contravention and methods to pay, and should also contain information on how you can appeal. Yours has no contravention code. The law was changed so that a minimum of 10 minutes should be given before issuing a “ticket” and I left within the 10th minute. The receipt was scanned within the grace period allowed, this again is in the Code of Practice, you should be abiding by. The use of CCTV is supposed only to be an aide to the enforcement of “tickets” and the government (DfT) stipulates: DfT’s statutory guidance already states that CCTV cameras should only be used where parking enforcement is difficult or sensitive and enforcement by a parking warden is not practical. The Home Office Code of Practice on CCTV surveillance published earlier this year confirmed this approach and added that CCTV should only be used where there is a “pressing need.” Many local authorities do not use CCTV to enforce parking, but there is increasing concern that of those that do, a number do not have sufficient regard to statutory guidance and are over-using CCTV. For example, Traffic Penalty Tribunal Adjudicators (who consider appeals against local authority parking tickets), in written evidence to the Transport Select Committee earlier this year said that they had found cases “where camera enforcement appears to be used as a matter of routine where the strict requirements in the DfT statutory guidance do not appear to be present. Failure to comply with the DfT guidance is not a ground of appeal and the effectiveness of the adjudication is curtailed in these circumstances.” The Government is concerned that, by using CCTV cameras in areas where enforcement could be undertaken by a parking warden, local authorities undermine public acceptance of their limited use for non-criminal offences. Drivers are also concerned that they may receive a parking ticket in the post weeks later, giving them no opportunity to examine the parking location as it was at the time of the alleged contravention. The Transport Select Committee has also welcomed the Government’s commitment to consult on ending the use of cameras for on-street parking enforcement. They add that “As long as the use of cameras remains legal, local authorities must ensure that they are not used as a matter of routine, particularly where permits or exemptions (such as resident permits or Blue Badges) not visible to the camera equipment may apply.” However, the Committee pointed out that cameras can still be helpful for enforcement in some areas where the use of a parking warden is not practical. You are not abiding by this Code of Practise either. This can only mean that Lidl and Athena have now resorted to these desperate and disgusting measures to extort money from loyal customers in the hopes that they will feel so threatened and confused that they will just pay up without question. I do not appreciate this trumped up accusation and as a long term sufferer of severe depression and anxiety, this "Notice to Keeper" has caused me unnecessary stress that I can well do without. I would also like to point out that I too am a regular customer at Lidl and find this harassing and bullying tactic of parking parasites that prey on innocent customers absolutely abhorrent. Sending threatening letters of this nature when there has been absolutely no wrong doing on my part or that of the driver of my car at that time is totally unacceptable. I feel that under the circumstances, there is no viable reason for obtaining my address, as the keeper of the car from the DVLA, let alone to pursue this nonsense and harass me making demands of payment from me. This must surely be unlawful and a violation of my rights in accordance with the Data Protection Act. It is totally unreasonable. I will certainly be looking into this further. I am the victim here and I will be writing to the DVLA and BPA on this matter. You do not have the right to harass law abiding motorists in this way. These shameful tactics of Lidl and Athena have made me feel even more vulnerable and anxious but I am so incensed at the injustice here that I will not be rolling over to willingly hand over my hard earned money to pay this outrageous demand out of principal. It concerns me greatly that Lidl and Athena are persecuting vulnerable, innocent customers in this way. Farming car parks in this way for profit is a covert practice which to any reasonable person, might appear to be a business model akin to a protection racket on site. The entire business approach and unwarranted threats to empty the pockets of loyal customers whilst they park to shop in Lidl stores, believing it to be a fairly operated car park is truly repugnant. Please be advised that there is a Sainsbury’s and Marks & Spencers just a few shops away from this Lidl store where they do not harass customers for parking to shop in their stores but up until now Lidl has been mine, my friends and family's preferred choice. What you are doing here to loyal Lidl customers is very damaging to the brand name. This urgently needs to change before you alienate the very people that keep Lidl in business. I will be writing to the CEO of Lidl with my complaint of this. I will also be contacting the local council as I'm pretty sure this treatment of local people would not have been part of the agreement when contracts were drawn up and permissions were sought by Lidl and Athena. To add to this I will be writing in to Watch Dog to get your business practices looked into. I will certainly not be taking this day light robbery lying down. I may only be one person but I will not be bullied by big corporate companies that think they have the right to do whatever they like and in doing so blatantly ignore the guidelines, rules, legislation and code of conduct that governs you. Please address this matter immediately and cancel the parking notice/ticket forthwith and confirm this by return. Alternatively, please send me a POPLA code within the given time so that I may submit an appeal to the independent appeals service. As per GDPR I exercise my rights to see all data you have on me. After which I will then request that this is all destroyed. Yours Truly Have you had a response? Yes Dear Sir / Madam, Thank you for your email. Governing regulations and our data protection policies require us to validate the identity of correspondents when discussing cases in order to securely manage data and to take reasonable precautions regarding the privacy of peoples data. Your name used to sign the letter attached to the email does not match the name used in your email and the name we have on our system as the registered keeper and we can accept no further correspondence from you without correct validation of your identity. In order for us to process your requests and respond, we will require signatory proof. We can accept this in a form of a copy or photograph of a driving license or passport. We will await your response. Kind Regards, Data Protection Officer My daughters reply I have appealed using my father's email address, there is nothing untoward about this. I will not supply you with any proof of address or any form of ID as quite frankly I don't have to nor do I want too. When someone posts a letter of appeal do you request proof then? You've had my appeal by email as it shows the chain of correspondence between both parties Their response Dear Sir / Madam, Thank you for your email. Please appreciate that we have a requirement to keep personal data secure. We are requesting further identification proof to ensure that we are releasing / sharing personal data with the correct party. The letter attached to the original email makes a request for data under the General Data Protection Regulations to see all data held, we take these requests very seriously and will only share the information when we are satisfied that we are sharing the information correctly. In order to proceed with the adjudication of the appeal and to respond to the data request, we do require further identification proof such as a passport or drivers license. We will not be able to continue with your request without this validation. Kind Regards, Data Protection Officer Athena ANPR Ltd My daughters reply OK had I used my own email ThefutureMrsbeiber*****.com You'd have been fine with that? You've received all the information you'll get from me and also my appeal. I await your decision on my appeal Also I sent this This is tantamount to harassment now, I quite frankly find it alarming and distressing. We have both told you you will not be receiving any proof of ID, so stop asking. Considering your company was taken off the DVLA’s approved list, there is no way we will provide anything further than we already have, we are protecting our personal data. Now consider the appeal Megan has put forward for your invoice because that is all it is, an invoice. Any further attempts to obtain my daughters personal data by way of Passport or Driving Licence will be forwarded to the police for their consideration whether it falls under section 4. 7 Who is the parking company? Athena 8. Where exactly Lidl, Eltham For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. IPC
  5. My daughter received a so called PCN from these jokers, she had apparently overstayed by 10 minutes. I helped her with the appeal letter and we sent it using my email. They've replied saying they can't continue correspondence as the name on the email is different from the name they have on file as registered keeper & they want proof of ID either Passport or Driving Licence. We've both replied saying that's not happening & my daughter asked whether they'd have requested ID from a posted letter appeal and her email could be unicorns&rainbows@blahblah and that wouldn't match the name either. I've requested they just judge the appeal and get on with it we'll then go to PATAS or London Tribunals if it goes against us and I feel alarmed at their harassment and it's distressing. Any further tips, its my first post so thanks in advance
×
×
  • Create New...