Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • now read my post again carefully.. dx  
    • Thanks. I often use this free site  https://www.sejda.com/compress-pdf  for work to compress PDFs. If it's no good, as you say, split it, and we'll do the biz at this end tomorrow. Knackered here - more in the morrow.
    • This is the covering email response (all personal details removed) - the pdf with all the info is 8mb - too big to upload - I'll need to split it and redact it tomorrow. Dear, We write further to your recent correspondence. We note from this that you have submitted a Request for Access pursuant to Article 15 of the UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR). We wish to confirm that the response provided below, and via the enclosed documents, concerns the Parking Charge referenced above. This data is provided on the basis that we note that you have already been identified as the registered keeper of the vehicle in question in relation to the dates of 22nd August 2023 and 11th September 2023 and therefore we can be satisfied, to the standard required, that the data collected and processed in respect of that vehicle on that date is personal data pertaining to you. We can confirm that your name and address were provided by the DVLA on 26th August 2023. This data was provided as you were identified as the registered keeper of vehicle in respect of a breach of the parking terms and conditions that took place within Mary Street, Carlisle on 22nd August 2023 Parkingeye can confirm that we issued a total of 5 items of correspondence to yourself to date prior to any further recovery or legal action. The address used was the address as held by the DVLA for the Registered Keeper of the vehicle. As no response was received to any of the correspondence sent, Parkingeye contacted a tracing agent to obtain any potential alternative address. To which end, an alternative address for yourself was provided and further items of correspondence were sent. Please note, whilst Experian are a credit referencing agency, no credit check has been undertaken in relation to this Parking Charge. We only utilise their tracing service in order to obtain alternative contact details. For clarity, personal data sent to our tracing agent is done so via an encrypted transmission route, therefore we do not hold physical copies of the same. The categories of personal data we send to them is your name, address and vehicle details. As Parkingeye did not receive any response to the correspondence sent, we entered into legal proceedings on 8th January 2024 in order to recover the outstanding sum owed for the Parking Charge and further costs were incurred. We can confirm that your name and address were provided by the DVLA on 15th September 2023. This data was provided as you were identified as the registered keeper of vehicle in respect of a breach of the parking terms and conditions that took place within Mary Street, Carlisle on 11th September 2023 . Parkingeye can confirm that we issued a total of 5 items of correspondence to yourself to date prior to any further recovery or legal action. The address used was the address as held by the DVLA for the Registered Keeper of the vehicle. As no response was received to any of the correspondence sent, Parkingeye contacted a tracing agent to obtain any potential alternative address. To which end, an alternative address for yourself was provided and further items of correspondence were sent. Please note, whilst Experian are a credit referencing agency, no credit check has been undertaken in relation to this Parking Charge. We only utilise their tracing service in order to obtain alternative contact details. For clarity, personal data sent to our tracing agent is done so via an encrypted transmission route, therefore we do not hold physical copies of the same. The categories of personal data we send to them is your name, address and vehicle details. As Parkingeye did not receive any response to the correspondence sent, we contacted our recovery agent in order to recover the outstanding sum owed against the Parking Charge. For clarity, personal data sent to our recovery agent is done so via an encrypted transmission route, therefore we do not hold physical copies of the same. The categories of personal data we send to them is your name, address and vehicle details. We can confirm, in line with s.(1)(h) of Article 15, that no automated decision-making or profiling, referred to in Article 22(1) and (4), has been undertaken in relation to personal data in this case. We note that Article 22 states as follows, “The data subject shall have the right not to be subject to a decision based solely on automated processing, including profiling, which produces legal effects concerning him or her or similarly significantly affects him or her”. We can confirm that you have not been subject to such a decision and that the processing falls outside the scope of Article 22. Any automated checks undertaken by Parkingeye in relation to ANPR data will only result in a decision not to issue a Parking Charge. Should the ANPR data we process indicate that a breach of the parking terms and conditions has taken place, any subsequent decision to issue a Parking Charge will require that data to pass through a substantial checking process that includes human intervention. Please note that the UK General Data Protection Regulation provides the following further rights:   •             The right to request from Parkingeye access, rectification or erasure of your personal data; •             The right to request from Parkingeye restriction of processing of your personal data; •             The right to object to the processing of your personal data.   Please note that some of these rights are not absolute and will only apply in certain circumstances. We will review each request we receive in respect of these rights. We do not have to agree with a request but if we refuse, we will still contact the data subject within one month to explain why. You also have the right to lodge a complaint with the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). For further information, please refer to the ICO website, www.ico.org.uk. You may also seek a judicial remedy. For further information about your rights as a data subject, plus information about the categories of data we process, data transfers, the legal basis for our processing, and the purposes of processing, please visit: https://www.Parkingeye.co.uk/privacy-policy/   Yours sincerely,   Parkingeye Privacy Team
    • Thanks to you both.  I'd guessed it was CCTV, but the creeps who sneak up and take photos of the vehicles also use time stamps. BTW TT98, what you have received is not a fine, you can never be clobbered for the statutory consequences of not paying a fine - because it isn't one.  It's an invoice, and they have the same right to sue you as you have the right to sue anyone as a layperson who doesn't pay you for an invoice.  It's just a simple civil matter about a "debt".  Nothing worse.
    • As Dave has already said there are Consideration periods and Grace periods to be taken into account when private parking is involved. Before looking at that the first thing is to check whether your PCN complies with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 which regulates the private parking rogues. They were very good at twice quoting from the Act but they missed Section 9[2][e] (e)state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper— (i)to pay the unpaid parking charges; They didn't do that so they have not complied with the Act which means they cannot pursue you as the keeper only as the driver which they said themselves when quoting Section 9 [2][f] . In addition they are supposed to quote the period of parking but instead given the times of arrival and departure of your vegicle which is not the same thing.Obviously their times  include the driving times to the parking place plus later from the parking place to the exit. So removing those times from your 15 minute overtime and that doesn't include extra minutes when your car was held up by stopping for pedestrians or other cars passing in front of you as well as returning the shopping trolley and possibly  queueing to get out of the car park. And that doesn't include children and or disabled people causing greater differences betwen their times and the actual parking period which is what is specified in the Act. It is perfectly possible that as much as fifteen minutes longer  could be taken in a larger busy car park compared to their spurious ANPR times. You may have noticed sating well done to you in his post. that was for two reasons. The first for giving us all the necessary details surrounding the alleged breach. the second well done was for not appealing a possibly giving away who was driving. As you the keeper is not responsible now for paying the PCN and Highview do not know who was driving they will have difficulty if the take you to Court since Courts do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person which is quite right considering that quite often family members often drive as opposed to the keeper as can loads of other people drive your  who have valid insurance motor policies. So don't worry even if you have to go to Court as the odds are in your favour and that's before we see the contract and Witness Statement which often give more ammunition against them.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
        • Like
      • 160 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

PE ANPR PCN - LOXFORD POLYCLINIC Ilford ***Cancelled by hospital***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 174 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hey guys, I don't  believe  it.

Here is the 4 car car park that the vehicle was waiting in whilst I went to my appointment.

I saw the "patients and visitors only" momentarily as I drove in, I also noticed the "STAFF ONLY" sign as I drove inwards causing me to stop and not proceed any further.

I reversed into the parking space and went for my blood test.

No where upon my journey was it made obvious that I was parking in a restricted space or that I needed to ask permission to park there, upon entry to the hospital there are no clear signs at all regarding anything to do with parking.

Who here thinks that I would have purposely put myself in the position of getting a ticket after all the anguish these people are causing me.

This is becoming so obvious that it is purposely set up like this with the intent to farm people.

I am so angry that they are allowed to cause people harm in this fashion. 

I am writing to NELFT now for them to get this cancelled, hopefully I can report back shortly with some good news, failing that, any advice at this stage will be greatly welcomed.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're a pro at this now. You've already shown above that know what to do 😁

Just remember not to out yourself...

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

Link to post
Share on other sites

I sent an email off to NELFT ceo office again, they cant complain its out of their hands.

 

If they do not help me, I guess it will be a re run with Parkingeye again.

 

Part of me feels like I should have affix a counter offer on the vehicle that states all offers are subject to a consideration fee of £200. 

There has to be a way to counter them at their game. It can't all be one way. "we have sign that says you have to pay us". 

There MUST be some form of defense that dissuades people from entering into contract with you, if there was a cost associated with it, like there is for engaging in contract with them, then it is only fair that it can work both ways.

What do people here think??

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to PE ANPR PCN - LOXFORD POLYCLINIC

sticky please....

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to PE ANPR PCN - LOXFORD POLYCLINIC Ilford

Are you saying it is ok for Adam to demand money from Dave with the aid of the Court because Dave stood near Adams sign but didn't even see it, but if Dave wants to demand money from Adam because Adam ignored Dave's sign, it is not ok and that Dave has to just jog on? My apologies if I got that wrong but that's how it sounds. I'm not trying to be awkward but It certainly all sounds one way to me... It also appears again that these sites are set up to entrap people. Funny that...

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 Date of the infringement 20/08/2023

 

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 24/08/2023

3 Date received 26/08/2023
 

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?] Y
 

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Y
 

6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] N
 

Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up N/A
 

7 Who is the parking company? ParkingEye

 

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Loxford Polyclinic Barking/Ilford
 

For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under.

POPLA

I know HoneyBee, we are all on the same side here!! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the sites are set up to entrap drivers, but you already know that. I believe I pointed out moves that are in hand to control these vermin on your other threads.

It's just a matter of time.

Although, I'm sure the fleecers will come up with various wrinkles and tactics to try to get around any new independent code of practice.

  • Like 1

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys, 


I just received this email response from NELFT CEO office

 

"I confirm receipt of your email yesterday, apologies there are competing priorities in the inbox to deal with.

 

I will forward this onto our Estates Department for advice, however as there has been a previous parking ticket challenged I am not sure they will be able to assist.

 

I will of course keep you informed.

 

Kind Regards"


 

 

Edited by Reapstar
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Reapstar said:

however as there has been a previous parking ticket challenged I am not sure they will be able to assist.

What a naughty boy you are!

Challenging multiple parking tickets indeed...

 

My god, who does this person think they are?!

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

Link to post
Share on other sites

If there are no signs showing parking restrictions quite obviously patients going for multiple appointments are going to get multiple tickets.

  • Like 1

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, I've hidden my post above which is misleading.

Talking of misleading - so the first sign says "Patients & Visitors Only" and then suddenly you get a second sign with "STAFF ONLY".  It's obvious patients will get confused.

Did you park in the first part before the "STAFF ONLY" sign?

Also, can we see the PCN please to see what the fleecers are accusing you of?

The charlatans will not pursue people living abroad, so I have an idea.  Let's see what you e-mail exchange produces first however.

  • Like 1

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers Nicky!!

The car was parked in the first section it was the second spot in as it goes.

When I saw the sign for STAFF ONLY I immediately stopped because I was going to use that area to turn around, so instead, I just reverse parked as all the other cars are in the photo. There was no indication to me of any requirements other than having to be a patient. 

There was also no signs or mention of having to input your reg anywhere which is what I believe the ticket is actually for.

I might have to put in an FOI to see how many tickets are being issued at these sites, would they have to give me that information, I believe it would be in the interest of the public to know.

PEYELOXFORD.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks.  What the hospital is allowing to go on is absolutely disgraceful.  Let's see what their reply says.

  • Like 1

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey guys, an update here :

 

"Please see the below response received from our Estates Department, as NELFT do not own the site in question you will need to take this up with the parking company directly.

 

“Best advice to people in receipt of a PCN is always for them to immediately engage directly with whichever parking management contractor issued the PCN. That’s usually through an appeal process. The worst thing to do is to ignore it as a legal process usually commences after a set period. Secondly, they can reach out to the owner/manager of the site (in this case NHSPS) to ask for them to investigate and support in genuine cases.”

 

Kind Regards"

 

Could someone help me with a reply to this please, I am just trying to cool the blood down right now. 

Edited by Reapstar
Link to post
Share on other sites

So, they've given you details of the actual landowners...

WWW.PROPERTY.NHS.UK

We Are A Government-Owned Company Which Exists To Help The NHS Get The Most From Its Estate, And Ensure That It Is Consistently Fit For...

So, presumably a letter / email to the appropriate person / department is the way to go... And you must be getting good at them by now.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here we go :

 

 

Good afternoon (Victim)

Thank you for contacting NHS Property Services.

I am sorry to hear that you have received a parking charge.

In the first instance, you will need to appeal the charge - full details should be on the PCN.

Please update us following your appeal.

Thank you

What would be the best response to this to cut this short??

 

Cheers guys.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...