Saturday, 31 December 2016

Picture of the week - ParkingEye 19 point checklist

ParkingEye are famous for claiming to have a 19 point checklist to ensure their notice to keeper documents are always compliant.

As you can see, it's not very good.

Prankster Note

It appears from this parking charge notice there was no just cause to access the DVLA for keeper data. The keeper should therefore consider a claim against ParkingEye for a breach of the data protection act. If they wish to do this they should start off with a letter before claim.

My name and address information (together with other information) is classified as personal data within the meaning of s1(1) of the Data Protections Act (DPA). You are misusing this data by attempting to claim a charge is do when no lawful reason exists. I refer you to your parking charge notice where there is no evidence the vehicle arrived at the time stated.

This is therefore a breach of data principle 1 (data must be used lawfully).

The case of Vidal-Hall v Google Inc [2014] EWHC 13 (QB) provides authority that misuse of personal data is a tort and that damages may be non-pecuniary. The case of Halliday v Creation Consumer Finance Ltd [2013] All ER (D) 199 provides authority that a reasonable sum for compensation would be £750.

The case of VCS v Phillip, claim number C9DP2D6C Liverpool 07/12/2016, while not binding, concerns a motorist sent a parking charge which was not valid. The judge awarded £250 for a DPA breach. This is therefore a persuasive case that a DPA breach occurs when a parking charge is not legitimately pursued, and that a sum of at least £250 is compensation for pursuing a purported parking charge when there is no reasonable prospect of success.

Please therefore remit the sum of £250 to myself 14 days. I will accept this sum in full and final compensation for the matter. I reserve the right to take legal action without further notice if this amount is not paid.

I am willing to use alternative dispute resolution to attempt to settle this dispute and suggest the Consumer Ombudsman is a suitable body

Happy Parking

The Parking Prankster


  1. Ah, the 19 point checklist thing again.
    Wake up DVLA. These scumbags lie through their teeth.
    Personally I'd go for the full £750 as there is a huge breakdown of duty of care here. I'd also make sure the DVLA gets a complaint asap.

  2. This is so frustrating. I have spoken to the driver in this matter and unfortunately he does not want to claim anything. as the saying goes you can lead a horse to water but you can`t make it drink.

    1. What is peoples opinion on a PCN for driving into a car park, becoming stationary for 3 mins on some cross hatchings then driving away. Barely long enough to read the signage. Im on the NPE, Gladstones etc hit-list i think...

  3. Someone should demand to see this checklist in court, and then tear them apart when it's apparent they haven't done any of it.

    1. I think I recall M'learned Pranky doing that very thing.......................and then some tumbleweed blew across the room.

  4. Lol. Jonty from PE reckoned the systems were in place at The Palace.

    God save The Queen.

    As an aside, I was in Court today. (Unrelated matter.)

    What a horrible grubby world.

  5. Hi

    Background: parked between 9am - 5pm hours in a flat-rate charge car park- £4.50 all day between 6am - 6pm. I paid at 1pm via text. regardless of when i paid, the amount does not change.

    I recently took PE to POPLA and won. What annoys me is that they should have accepted my appeal and not dragged me through the rest of the POPLA process.

    I know that they know what they were doing was wrong because they previously allowed my appeals for the exact same reason on previous tickets- yet on this one, rejected my appeal.

    I now want to sue them for a DPA breach - they were chasing an illegitimate charge and had no prospect of getting it but still requested details from DVLA- and here is the important bit - THEY KNEW THIS, but did it anyway. Prima facie evidence of a DPA breach, am i right?

    I presume the process is automated and its cheaper to get a machine to issue the demands than to get a person to actually study the appeal properly. Either that, or they have some sort of target-based culture. Worse still, they may believe they have nothing to lose and £100 to gain by simply dismissing my appeal.

    could anyone advise me on how to proceed with action?

    You can reach me on

    1. Mr Khan. I will give a good friend of mine your email. he will help you get compensation.

  6. What is peoples opinion on a PCN for driving into a car park, becoming stationary for 3 mins on some cross hatchings then driving away. Barely long enough to read the signage. Im on the NPE, Gladstones etc hit-list i think...

    1. Not usually an offence as the signage will not be visible. If it is, it would be a trespass, so only the landowner can sue, and then only for actual damages or a nominal £1