JD Parking Consultants Ltd PCN - 35 Hallgate car park Doncaster DN1 3NL

[paulwlton]

Hold my hands up I parked in a permit area after getting lost in Doncaster after sat nav problems and late for a course....long story.

 

Just received a PCN for £100 reduced to £60 if paid within 14 days from a company called Debt Recovery Plus trading as Parking Collection Services Ltd on behalf of their client "creditor" JD Parking Consultants Limited who manage the land.

 

The letter states that the parking charge was issued following the use of warden operated camera system. I presume the stated system is therefore operated by JD Parking Consultants Limited?

 

As I understand, a company is required to register with the ICO if it intends to process personal data and failure to do so pursuant section 17(1) of the Data Protection Act 1998 is a strict liability criminal offence.

 

If the matter was to proceed to court, the photographic evidence, i presume, would be inadmissible.??

 

Not sure of any other way to challenge this.

 

Any Thoughts?

 

dont they need to register with the ICO for a camera system as long as it doesn't take photos of any individuals. However, JD Parking must be included on the ICO register to process personal data.

[paulwlton]

Thanks for this. The address is - 35 Hallgate car park - Doncaster, DN1 3NL

[paulwlton]

Thanks again for sharing your knowledge. I shall do some research.

 

Regards

Edited May 15, 2018 by dx100uk
quote

[paulwlton]

Im assuming it would the landowner that would need to contact the DVLA?

Edited May 15, 2018 by dx100uk
quote

[paulwlton]

Cheers mate. I guess ill be doing a lot of reading up on this, especially the possible DPA breach - would be nice to issue a claim for the same under section 13.

 

Coincidently I've been reading up on the DPA 1998 and the GDPR that takes effect after May 25th and have several ongoing complaints at the ICO under various provisions against a couple of companies.

 

I'll post the notice and take a few pictures of the signage etc.

 

Regards

 

Any idea what a warden operated camera system is? and would the same be run by JD parking consultants or the landowners?

 

Ill take some photos tomorrow of the signage and post them up on Thursday.

[paulwlton]

The first sign on entry makes it clear that theres no offer to park, however, the other signs appear to be contractual. ??

 

 

[Please upload your images as a pdf - dx]

[paulwlton]

Thanks for your input.

Just finished a 12 hour night shift - will read up after a kip.

 

Regards

 

 

Not sure I understand the data protection aspect of it. Can you explain please or provide a link??

 

[Please upload your images as a PDF - dx]

[paulwlton]

The notice is from Parking collection services Limited - a trading name of debt Recovery Plus Ltd, who are supposedly acting on behalf of JD Parking Consultants Limited.

 

Any idea who has the legal authority to request my personal data from the DVLA? and how do I find out who actually requested it?

 

Im assuming it was Debt Recovery Plus Ltd who requested it, because JD Parking Consultants are precluded from processing personal data as they are not registered with the ICO.

[paulwlton]

Every data controller MUST BE registered with the ICO to request and obtain an individuals personal data. Failure to do so is a strict liability offence.

 

I'll do some more digging. Think ill submit a section 24 DPA 1998 request off to JD Parking for their registered particulars pursuant section 16 of the same. Section 24 gives them 21 days to provided information in respect of processing of data. Lets see what exemption they are to rely on (if any) - failure to comply with section 24 DPA 1998 is an offence in its own right.

 

The DVLA state that the company requesting data MUST provide evidence to show they are acting on behalf of the land owner. JDP, i believe are acting on behalf of the owner (whoever that is)...so, its probable that they requested my data.

 

If they have they've blown it. And if Debt Recovery Plus Limited requested my data then they would have had to provide evidence that they were acting on behalf of the landowner, which it was impossible to do because they are acting on behalf of JDC ltd and the DVLA are screwed for breaching their own code.

 

Its all unravelling.

 

Just rang the DVLA. I need to submit a request to them in writing and they'll provide the requester.

 

Ill post this off.

 

JD Parking Consultants Limited

Pavilion Business Centre Stanningley Road,

Stanningley,

Pudsey,

West Yorkshire,

LS28 6NB

 

Company registration number 06538684

 

Dated 18th May 2018

 

FTAO Data Controller

 

To Whom It May Concern:

 

I recently perused the ICO register and was unable to find JD Parking Consultants Limited registration.

 

If you are exempt from notification please provide the exemption you rely on. It is a strict liability offence to process data without registration pursuant section 17(1) Data Protection Act 1998.

 

If you are exempt from notification, please take this letter as a request pursuant section 24 of the aforementioned Act and provide me with the requisite particulars as per section 16(1). I advise that failure to comply with section 24 within the prescribed time constitutes an offence.

 

Yours Faithfully

Paul Walton

[paulwlton]

Ive rang the DVLA and they've given me an address to write to and they will confirm the requester within one to two weeks. is that a problem?

 

I take note of the landowner and opposite of requirement. However, I take issue that I'm talking rubbish when I'm correct. I suggest you read up on the data protection Act?

 

What evidence do private companies need to provide to receive DVLA data?

Companies requesting information to enforce parking charges must provide details of their business activities along with evidence to show they are acting on behalf of the land owner, that a parking charge scheme actually exists and that motorists are made aware of the scheme in force. Companies have to be registered with the Information Commissioner’s Office and be current members of an ATA.

Regards

[paulwlton]

I understand the arguments and I too believe that JDP requested my details.

 

As I’ve already stated JDP cannot request anyone’s data because they are not registered with the ICO. Furthermore, by processing data without registration they commit a criminal offence pursuant section 17(1) DPA (this changes after the 25th May 2018)

 

Im going to submit an application to the ICO for an assessment pursuant section 42 DPA 1998 on whether JDP are complying fully with the ACT and in particular requesting personal data whilst in criminal breach.

 

The offence is a strict liability offence under section 19 of the Act. There is no defence and the director of the company is prosecuted.

 

Section 13 DPA 1998 provides that if there is a contravention of any requirement of the Act then anyone suffering damage or distress as the right to compensation.

 

Remember there’s lots of ways to skin a cat.

 

But then again I may be talking rubbish.

 

[Please upload your images as a PDF - dx]

[paulwlton]

I'll post the letter off to the DVLA and the section 17 DPA request to JD Parking today.

 

A photograph of a vehicle registration is personal data and obtaining, sharing of the same is processing. JDP is a Data controller therefore must be registered with the ICO.

 

Should I appeal this or just let them chase me for payment?

 

As advised earlier on the thread only only a small amount is recoverable for trespass.

 

Parking charges and the penalty rule

 

97. ParkingEye concedes that the £85 is payable upon a breach of contract, and that it is not a pre-estimate of damages. As it was not the owner of the car park, ParkingEye could not recover damages, unless it was in possession, in which case it may be able to recover a small amount of damages for trespass. This is because it lost nothing by the unauthorised use resulting from Mr Beavis overstaying.

 

On the contrary, at least if the £85 is payable, it gains by the unauthorised use, since its revenues are wholly derived from the charges for breach of the terms. The notice at the entrance describes ParkingEye as being engaged to provide a “traffic space maximisation scheme”, which is an exact description of its function.

 

In the agreed Statement of Facts and Issues, the parties state that “the predominant purpose of the parking charge was to deter motorists from overstaying”, and that the landowner’s objectives include the following:

[paulwlton]

I understand that theres no contract and that ONLY the landowner is able to sue for

trespass.

 

In relation to vehicle registration numbers being personal data, Please read para 6.

 

 

https://ico.org.uk/media/about-the-ico/consultation-responses/2015/1431796/ico-response-to-dclg-parking-reform-consultation.pdf

[paulwlton]

I am not jumping any gun.

 

I have sent a letter to the DVLA to find out who requested my details and I’ve sent JDP a legal request pursuant section 24 DPA to provide further information as they are not registered with the ICO.

 

Please advise what I’ve done wrong so far!?!

 

Regards

 

Checked again on the ICO register and J D Parking are registered.

 

Ill chill now and wait for the DVLA to get back.

[paulwlton]

The letter I sent to JDP was a separate issue to the parking notice and in no way did I refer to the parking charge I've received.

 

I'll post what the DVLA send.

 

Regards

[paulwlton]

DVLA emailed me yesterday, they're sending details of the requester by first class post, so should receive it today or tomorrow.

 

Question for ericsbrother could the charge be contractual in nature??

 

Regards

 

I don't like this judgment!

 

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?act=attach&type=post&id=27029

 

Para 14, 15 of the judgment below makes sense.

 

http://nebula.wsimg.com/07b493fc1a4ea8623a8fe73dce20287a?AccessKeyId=4CB8F2392A09CF228A46&disposition=0&alloworigin=1

[paulwlton]

Ok, ill read up. Is this judgment relevant?

 

http://nebula.wsimg.com/07b493fc1a4ea8623a8fe73dce20287a?AccessKeyId=4CB8F2392A09CF228A46&disposition=0&alloworigin=1

[paulwlton]

But its regarding a parked car.

 

http://nebula.wsimg.com/07b493fc1a4ea8623a8fe73dce20287a?AccessKeyId=4CB8F2392A09CF228A46&disposition=0&alloworigin=1

[paulwlton]

If all you intend to do is lambast, please do not post on my thread again. If you'd took notice I stated that par 14, 15 of the stated judgement made sense.

 

Its a parking charge, it is not a big issue to me whether it goes to court or not. I have issued claims against bigger fish than a small parking company and had fun doing so.

[paulwlton]

I know very little at the moment, so I continue to read up and garner knowledge on the matter.

 

For the charge to be contractual the driver must have been issued with a permit which allowed the contractual right to park. If the driver then failed to display the permit I believe the charge would have been enforceable.

 

JD Parking have stated in email exchange that the charge is payable under contract, this is contrary to the second case.

 

I should receive the information from the DVLA today.

 

I do intend to issue a claim under the data protection act, but I need to be confident of all my arguments.

 

In addition to my last post as I read it the contract is formed when the permit has been issued and not when the vehicle enters the land.

[paulwlton]

Thank you.

[paulwlton]

DVLA has confirmed that the enquirer was Debt Recovery LTD for JD Parking consultants Ltd.

[paulwlton]

Strange that the DVLA are providing data to Debt Recovery who are not members of BPA on behalf of JD parking who are members of BPA.

 

If Paul has got the details the right way round is there a Data Protection query involved? Where do Debt Recovery get the right to ask for our details when they are not a party to any parking infringement that may or may not have occurred.

 

 

Good point.

 

Debt Reovery Plus are members.

 

You may still have a point regarding DRP requesting and obtaining my details though. The DVLA state that information can be released to Landowners or their agents. Debt Recovery Plus are neither the Landowner nor or they the agent of the Landowner. This is dependant though, on the charge being contractual in nature, however, as we know a contract was never performed, so the only entity that has the right to request my data is the Landowner or whoever is/was in possession of the land.

 

Seems that the creditor or the agent of the creditor can request keeper details.

 

The FOPA 2012 does allow the agent of a creditor to request keeper details.

Edited June 10, 2018 by dx100uk
Merge

[paulwlton]

if that is true then you can sue the DVLA as NO third party has a right to obtain your keeper details. Report this to the ICO as well as a complaint.

If it was the other way round then the DVLA are still breaking the law for the reason already stated. This is well established so I cant see what the DVLA is playing at.

 

 

Are you sure on this? If you are correct ill take your advice and submit a complaint to the DVLA and report the matter to the ICO.

[paulwlton]

Just received the email below from the DVLA. The response isn't good enough, so Ive requested that they provide, or attest that they have evidence which allows the DVLA to provide Debt Recovery with my personal data. The DVLA are going to contact the relevant department and then respond.

 

 

 

Good Morning,

 

I obtained some further advice on this, just to ensure the information I am giving is correct.

 

The company Debt Recovery Plus is acting as the landowners Agents in this matter, through having either a contract with the landowner themselves or a contract with a third party company acting on behalf of the Landowners (The third party company having authority to employ other companies to act on behalf of the landowner).

 

I trust this will assist you