Author Topic: Proof that ANPR cameras in car parks don't work  (Read 88295 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline The Bald Eagle

  • Administrator
  • Follower
  • *****
  • Posts: 4285
  • THE lowest common denominator
Re: Proof that ANPR cameras in car parks don't work
« Reply #135 on: 21 September, 2017, 10:08:30 AM »
#111

ANPR cameras cannot perceive of problems with paying for parking. They only facilitate the issue of parking tickets to those who make every effort to pay.

===========================================


Bath woman prepared to go to court over 'grossly unfair' parking fine from hospital car park

Brenda Richards is "absolutely furious" about being charged £80 by the private company that runs the car park at the Royal United Hospital

[There is a video on the website but I do not know how to put a link to it on here. Go here to view http://www.bathchronicle.co.uk/news/bath-news/bath-woman-prepared-go-court-500648]

A Bath woman is “absolutely furious” after she was fined £80 for parking at the Royal United Hospital having tried several times to pay at two machines.

Brenda Richards had been visiting a very ill friend when she found she was unable to pay at two machines operated by Parking Eye.

The 77-year-old said that she and her husband tried to pay three times at one machine and once at another before giving up and leaving with four receipts marked “card void”.

A week later, the Fairfield Park couple received an “invoice” from Parking Eye telling them they owed £80 because they had not paid for the 66 minutes their white Kia Sportage spent in the hospital car park on July 25.


Brenda Richards is "absolutely furious" about the £80 'invoice' from Parking Eye (Image: Artur Lesniak)

Mrs Richards said she appealed the fine, but was “very quickly” turned town by the company.

A second appeal with independent adjudicator POPLA – Parking On Private Land Appeals – is under way.

Mrs Richards said that she is prepared to go to court over the fine, which she deems “grossly unfair”.

“I am just so incensed,” she said.


Parking Eye runs the car parks at the RUH (Image: Parking Eye)

She said she and husband Graham Godman visited their friend in hospital more than a dozen times in the past three months, paying £2 to stay for an hour each time.

She had taken to leaving her handbag at home to reduce the spread of norovirus – a risk on the ward where their friend was staying – and so had no cash on her on the day in question.

“All I had was a few cards on me,” she said.

After receiving four “card void” receipts, and with two minutes to spare before their planned hour was up, Mrs Richards and Mr Godman left the car park unsure whether they had paid for parking.


The four receipts showing "card void" from Mrs Richards' four attempts to pay £2 on July 25

When no charge appeared on their credit card statement, the couple wondered whether to send a cheque for £2 to Parking Eye.

But Mrs Richards said she was assured twice by parking officials at the hospital that she would not be fined because none of the machines had been accepting card payments that day.

She said she was unaware it was possible to pay for parking by phone.

After receiving notice of the £80 fine from Parking Eye, Mrs Richards wrote to the parking operator explaining what had happened.


Mrs Richards with the 'invoice' from Parking Eye telling her she has 28 days to pay £80 or 14 days to pay £40 (Image: Artur Lesniak)

In a letter rejecting her appeal, Parking Eye wrote: “Our records confirm that no parking was purchased on the date of the parking event, despite there being payment methods available on the day in question.”

Signs at the hospital advise that parking tariffs can be paid by coin, card or ‘paybyphone’.

The company advised Mrs Richards she could appeal via POPLA and that, “as a gesture of goodwill”, it would give her an extra two weeks to pay a discounted fine of £40.

“I’m absolutely furious,” Mrs Richards said.


Mrs Richards and her husband had parked their white Kia Sportage in the hospital car park (Image: Artur Lesniak)

She kept all her receipts showing she tried to pay four times on the day in question and paid for parking at the RUH on ten occasions before that day and five afterwards.

Appealing to POPLA, she wrote: “My contention is that it shows an absolute willingness to pay for parking and no intention to avoid such payment.

“I made four attempts to pay on the day in question and the reason I could not pay was that a fault in Parking Eye’s machines meant that none of them could accept payment by card.

“An employee of PE assured me that the company knew of the fault and would not impose a fine in those circumstances.

“To be fined by PE is, therefore, grossly unfair and I am prepared to go to court for a judge to decide the matter.”


One of the receipts showing "card void"

A spokesman from Parking Eye said the company was not aware of any problems with parking machines at the hospital that day.

He said: “People attending Royal United Hospitals Bath can pay for parking via the ‘PayByPhone’ service or at one of the ten payment machines provided across the site.

“We encourage people who have received a parking charge to appeal if they think there are mitigating circumstances, and instructions about how to do this are detailed on all communications and on our website.

“If a driver disagrees with our decision, they have the option to appeal to the independent appeals service (POPLA).”

POPLA is an independent parking appeals service set up by the British Parking Association. It is administered by The Ombudsman Service, which then charges the BPA for all the cases it handles, regardless of outcome.

The Bath Chronicle has contacted the RUH for comment.

http://www.bathchronicle.co.uk/news/bath-news/bath-woman-prepared-go-court-500648
WE ARE WATCHING YOU

Offline Web Admin

  • Administrator
  • Follower
  • *****
  • Posts: 723
Re: Proof that ANPR cameras in car parks don't work
« Reply #136 on: 06 October, 2017, 04:46:09 PM »
#112 and 113

Any ANPR system that allows you to input a VRM that it has not detected is not fit for purpose and would never get type approval from government, so why do government let them get away with it?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

O NO Dad-of-two dragged to court after refusing to pay parking fine for putting zero rather than an O on ticket

James Lewis was shopping at Erith Riverside Shopping Centre car park, in South East London, when slapped with a £60 fine

A DAD-of-two is being dragged to court after accidentally pressing zero rather than the letter O as he entered his registration number to park for FREE.

James Lewis, 31, was shopping at Erith Riverside Shopping Centre car park, in South East London, when jobsworths grabbed the opportunity to slap him with a £60 fine.


James Lewis faces going to court over an unpaid parking fine - because he used the number zero rather than O

The outraged motorist, who was parked for less than an hour, has since refused to pay the parking charge - but now faces a day in court.

He told The Sun Online: "I got a letter in the post about the fine, but I thought there must have just been a mistake. I lodged an appeal and sent off a picture of my ticket.

"But because I typed zero rather than the letter O into the machine there, the parking firm came back and said it was my fault.

"Since then I have been threatened with legal action and contacted around five times in the post.


James has been battling with Smart Parking Limited for more than four months

"The fine is probably ten times more now.

"It's annoying because I've never had anything like this before and when you see that brown envelope come through the door you just think, 'oh no what's this?'

"I was only parking for free for around an hour and then suddenly was being told to pay £60."

The 31-year-old HGV driver was out Sunday shopping when he accidentally typed YB09VA0 instead of YB09VAO when entering his registration plate for free parking.


Smart Parking denied James' appeal after he sent off a copy of his ticket

James had no idea he had been slapped with a fine until a £60 charge landed on his doormat a few days later.

Smart Parking Limited, the firm which manages the car park, refused to back down over the error - and later upped the fine to £160.

That's despite claiming to apply a "common sense approach" when it comes to reviewing appeals.

Now defiant James has chosen to go to court instead of settling the debt.

The dispute has been ongoing since May 21, 2017.

Now James says he wants to prove a point to the "money-grabbing" company.

He added: "I am ignoring it now because it is just not worth my time.

"If it comes to it I will go to court. I won't just stand by while they whack me with a £60 fine because of something like this.


James, from South East London, says he will go to court over the parking dispute

"They need to have some common sense.

"It's been very frustrating for me, and I can imagine distressing for anyone else forced to pay for one tiny mistake.

"I am worried about the court action and the fine because I have a family to support, but let's see what the court has to say."

If the ruling does not go in James' favour, the dad-of-two will likely to be forced to pay the fine - on top of hefty court costs.

His fight comes after grandmother Sylvia Bradford was slapped with a £60 fine for legally leaving her car in the same free car park.


Sylvia Bradford, 70, made the same mistake at Erith Riverside Shopping Centre and was also told to hand over £60 to Smart Parking

The 70-year-old made the same error as James when she pressed the letter O rather than a zero on the machine with pale yellow letters on a silver background.

But after lodging a complaint, Smart Parking Limited said that it is sticking by its decision to issue the fine.

Sylvia plans to take her appeal to the ombudsman, meaning she will face paying out £100 if it is again refused.

She said: “My husband blew his fuse. This really does take the biscuit. It seems ridiculous. It’s common sense."


Smart Parking claims to use a 'common sense' approach when it comes to an appeal

The Sun Online has attempted to contact Smart Parking Limited for comment.

On its website, the firm says: "Smart Parking has gained a vast amount of experience over many years of handling parking related appeals.

"It goes without saying that each appeal is individually assessed by a trained appeals assessor, who will review not only the site rules, but will apply a common sense approach.

"If your appeal is refused, in order to avoid any further action you should pay the full PCN within 14 days."

A spokesman from the British Parking Association, of which Smart Parking is a member, said: "We would strongly advice motorists to follow the independent appeals process rather than choosing to ignore parking fines.

"There is no cost to go to Parking on Private Land Appeals (POPLA) to help with your case.

"Taking it to court is much more likely to occur costs."

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4624566/erith-riverside-shopping-parking-fine-bexley-london/

Offline DBC

  • Follower
  • **
  • Posts: 19
Re: Proof that ANPR cameras in car parks don't work
« Reply #137 on: 18 October, 2017, 07:50:11 PM »
http://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/loggerheads-mold-car-park-fines-13774891

Landlord's woe as car park fine scheme backlash nearly calls time on his pub

Offline 2b1ask1

  • Follower
  • **
  • Posts: 167
Re: Proof that ANPR cameras in car parks don't work
« Reply #138 on: 19 October, 2017, 09:40:48 AM »
I have no sympathy for the landlord, even a brief search online would have shown the scheme as unsuitable and as for getting into bed with the cowboys.... Numpty!
Willing to do my bit...

Offline The Bald Eagle

  • Administrator
  • Follower
  • *****
  • Posts: 4285
  • THE lowest common denominator
Re: Proof that ANPR cameras in car parks don't work
« Reply #139 on: 19 October, 2017, 10:10:15 AM »
I have no sympathy for the landlord, even a brief search online would have shown the scheme as unsuitable and as for getting into bed with the cowboys.... Numpty!

                                                                              <Yeahthat>
WE ARE WATCHING YOU

Offline The Bald Eagle

  • Administrator
  • Follower
  • *****
  • Posts: 4285
  • THE lowest common denominator
Re: Proof that ANPR cameras in car parks don't work
« Reply #140 on: 13 December, 2017, 11:43:58 AM »
#114

This is an admission by NCP Ltd (members of the BPA Ltd) that there is an inherent problem built in to ANPR enforcement systems. Put simply, a camera cannot possibly calculate the time spent parked.

======================================


RAF veteran wins battle over £100 parking fine after arguing clock should run from when he bought his £1 ticket rather than when he entered car park

Ex-RAF man Terence O'Halloran paid £1 to park for an hour but was given a fine
He claimed NCP had calculated the length of stay incorrectly and won his case
Mr O'Halloran said: 'It is not a victory. It is the correct analysis and decision'


A motorist who was insisted he was wrongly slapped with a £100 fine at a car park in Lincoln has claimed victory and got his ticket scrapped.

Ex-RAF man Terence O'Halloran paid £1 to park for an hour at St Rumbold's Street but was shocked to discover a penalty notice on his windscreen when he returned within the hour last month.

He claims NCP calculated the length of stay from the moment heentered the car park to the time he exited, rather than the clock starting when he bought his ticket from the machine.

Now financial journalist and analyst Terence has finally won his case and has had his ticket quashed.

He said: 'It is not a victory. It is the correct analysis and decision. The charge notice should not have been issued. People are now aware.'


Ex-RAF man Terence O'Halloran paid £1 to park for an hour at St Rumbold's Street but was shocked to discover a penalty notice on his windscreen when he returned within the hour

A letter addressed to Terence from NCP reads: 'Your appeal has been reviewed and has been considered in conjunction with the evidence gathered by our Automatic Number Plate Recognition cameras, which record your entry and exit times.

'Having considered the content of your letter we are prepared to cancel this notice.

'We would apologise for any inconvenience caused. Thank you for your correspondence.'

Mr O'Halloran, from Stainton by Langworth, previously told Lincolnshire Live: 'You expect to pay for the duration of your actual parking and in British Society you park up and pay at the machine and get your ticket.

'Your time starts when your ticket is issued. The NCP at St Rumbold's Street is busy so it can take 10 minutes to find a space.


Mr O'Halloran claims NCP calculated the length of stay from the moment he entered the car park to the time he exited, rather than the clock starting when he bought his ticket from the machine

'If you're parking for one hour apparently the time starts as your car enters the car park and concludes as your car exits the car park - that's given you something between 45 and 50 minutes' car parking.

'Apparently the time on your ticket means absolutely nothing to NCP.

'Yes, there is a 10 minute statutory over run but if you're searching for spaces before going to the machine to buy your ticket, time soon runs away.'

His car was clocked as he entered the car park at 10.36.51am on October 26 and when it left at 11.53.07 - a period of about 77 minutes.

'It took me five minutes to walk into town, 10 to 15 minutes for a haircut and then five minutes to return. I'm sure I was back within the hour.'

In a letter to Mr O'Halloran, NCP stated that there was a breach of the parking rules because the car was 'parked longer than the time paid for', as explained by 'clear signage'.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5172301/RAF-veteran-wins-battle-100-parking-fine.html
WE ARE WATCHING YOU

Offline BAILIFFCHASER

  • Follower
  • **
  • Posts: 234
Re: Proof that ANPR cameras in car parks don't work
« Reply #141 on: 16 December, 2017, 12:09:15 AM »
Well haven't on for a while but if i am right. Then a Parking Charge Notice is issued to the driver of the vehicle. Not the owner. Then why does everybody kick a fuss up. just write to the company issuing the charge etc and ask them for a picture of the driver. If they cant produce it then they cant pursue you as you do not know who the driver is. Its different if it was a Penalty charge Notice. Boy have i dealt with a load of these.

Offline Coco

  • Administrator
  • Follower
  • *****
  • Posts: 534
  • Northampton
Re: Proof that ANPR cameras in car parks don't work
« Reply #142 on: 16 December, 2017, 12:17:00 PM »
Well haven't on for a while but if i am right. Then a Parking Charge Notice is issued to the driver of the vehicle. Not the owner. Then why does everybody kick a fuss up. just write to the company issuing the charge etc and ask them for a picture of the driver. If they cant produce it then they cant pursue you as you do not know who the driver is. Its different if it was a Penalty charge Notice. Boy have i dealt with a load of these.

If you fail to identify the driver the Protection of Freedoms Act allows the issuer to pursue the Registered Keeper.

Offline Web Admin

  • Administrator
  • Follower
  • *****
  • Posts: 723
Re: Proof that ANPR cameras in car parks don't work
« Reply #143 on: 26 January, 2018, 11:44:58 AM »
#115

Smart Parking urged to review number plate error ‘fines’ after English court case


Smart Parking's Kinnoull Street car park in Perth.

Smart Parking has refused to reveal whether it will review its policies after a woman in England won a David and Goliath battle with a private parking firm over a number plate error.

Blessing Burgess paid for parking at a retail park in Stockport, Greater Manchester. However her husband Daniel had mistakenly entered the registration of their other car into the payment machine at the site.

The firm offered to reduce the amount owed to £10 as a “goodwill gesture” but Ms Burgess accused them of profiteering, given that they had suffered no financial loss.

However when the firm, Excel , took the case to Stockport Magistrates’ Court a judge ruled in the 31-year-old’s favour. https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/meet-blessing-burgess-mum-three-13311154

Payment machines requiring motorists to enter their vehicle registration numbers are used by Smart Parking in Perth, and dozens of drivers have been “fined” for errors including entering a zero on place of a letter O.

Perth and North Perthshire MP Pete Wishart, who has long campaigned against Smart Parking, said that private parking firms need to use common sense in cases of “simple human error”.

He said:  “My office has handed many of these cases to Smart Parking over the past two years, only to be told that the motorist is still at fault and that they have no intention of backing down.

“Now that a fellow private parking firm have lost their battle in the English courts, it is time for Smart Parking to accept that sometimes people can make mistakes and start acting constructively with motorists and elected representatives.

“Smart Parking are very fond of quoting the ‘Parking Eye v Beavis’ case in their hostile correspondence but I can’t imagine for a second they are going to start quoting this case where a judge found in favour of the motorist.

“When people can clearly prove that they have paid for parking but have made a genuine mistake, parking firms must see sense and withdraw their threat of legal action.

“I accept that parking firms must take action to prevent those knowingly flaunting the rules, but in all of the constituency examples I have sent them over the years, I have no cause to doubt that motorists were trying to pay for parking in good faith.”

A spokesman for Smart Parking refused to be drawn on whether the company would review it’s policy.

He said: “It is not for Smart Parking to comment on court cases where we are not involved or on the legal strategies employed.

“Instead, we are happy to confirm that we continue to operate our business according to our own high standards as well as the guidelines of the British Parking Association, of which we are a member.”

https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/local/perth-kinross/469905/smart-parking-urged-to-review-number-plate-error-fines-after-english-court-case/

Offline The Bald Eagle

  • Administrator
  • Follower
  • *****
  • Posts: 4285
  • THE lowest common denominator
Re: Proof that ANPR cameras in car parks don't work
« Reply #144 on: 12 March, 2018, 12:54:52 PM »
#116

COMMENT: Both these car parks are "Pay and Display" but are policed by cameras and not human beings (I use the term loosely when it comes to the wea$els). A human being would have seen the displayed ticket was compliant and no PCN would have been stuck on the windscreen, and even if it had the driver would definitely have kept his ticket as proof.

This is the very reason why councils are not allowed to use anpr cameras for enforcement purposes.

=====================================================


Parking company says sorry after wrongly dishing out fines on two of Stoke-on-Trent's biggest car parks

Angry motorists contact The Sentinel after landing £60 fines in Hanley

Parking giant NCP has apologised to angry motorists - after sending out £60 parking fines by mistake.

The company has blamed the problem on faulty payment machines at its two Stoke-on-Trent car parks over a three-day period.

The problem affected the Glass Street and Meigh Street car parks, in Hanley, between February 7 and 10.

Nicola Amison was stunned to receive a fine after parking her car for just 13 minutes - and is warning drivers to always keep their pay-and-display tickets.

The 33-year-old, of Bucknall, said: “I parked on February 7 for just 13 minutes and put £2 in the meter because it is £1.80-an-hour. But I was then fined and luckily I found my parking ticket.

“The parking charge notice I received said I entered at 2pm and left at 2.15pm but my ticket says I paid at 2.02pm.”


Nicola Amison was given a fine at the Meigh Street NCP car park after just 15 minutes.

Nicola vented her frustration on social media and was contacted by other victims.

Rob Poole, aged 45, of Sneyd Green, was shopping with his partner, Victoria Birch, when they received a parking ticket despite parking for just 30 minutes and buying a one-hour ticket.

He added: “We have sent our pay-and-display ticket to NCP but it should not be down to us to prove that we should not be fined – it should be down to the company to prove we did not pay. Some people will pay up to avoid the mither.”


The NCP car park in Meigh Street.

NCP has blamed the incorrect fines on a 'technical issue' and says it will refund the motorists.

A spokesman said: "Due to a technical issue at our two car parks in Stoke-on-Trent, NCP incorrectly ticketed some of our customers who had paid for their parking.

"After receiving a number of appeals we have investigated the situation and found that our payment machines experienced intermittent faults which meant some payments were not registered correctly, and therefore a parking charge notice may have been issued. We have now cancelled all notices which have been affected.

"This is an extremely unfortunate and rare situation and we would like to offer our most sincere apologies to any of our customers who have been unfairly ticketed at Meigh Street and Glass Street and apologise that they have found themselves in the situation where they have had to take the time to appeal to us."

https://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/news/stoke-on-trent-news/parking-company-says-sorry-after-1277964#
WE ARE WATCHING YOU

Offline TheKLF99

  • Civilian
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: Proof that ANPR cameras in car parks don't work
« Reply #145 on: 21 March, 2018, 11:13:29 AM »
I have just received a parking fine from an ANPR system they have at Sainsbury's in Kidderminster.

Again like so many others this system has clearly got it wrong

The night in question I went to Brierley Hill Civic centre to see Knightmare Live.  On my way there I popped into Sainsbury's for some sweets and drinks for the show.

I then carried on driving to Brierley Hill to watch the show.  3 1/2 hours later I returned back via Kidderminster to Ludlow, stopping at Sainsbury's to do a bit of food shopping and get some petrol.  I wanted to get some frozen food shopping and didn't want it to defrost whilst at the show.

The parking restrictions were no return within 2 hours.

For some reason their system must have missed my reg plate on the initial exit, although I still don't understand why the system isn't setup that it checks plates on entry for those already in the car park, if it did this then it could have worked out that if a reg plate that is currently in the car park has reentered the car park then clearly that vehicle left the car park and for some reason the ANPR missed it on the exit.  I work in computers and it's not that hard to program and check unless the obvious reason is to deliberately scam motorists with fake tickets (not to mention also illegally retrieving motorists details from DVLA due to their faulty system)

Thankfully for me though I had Google maps turned on at the time and that has monitored my entire journey which proves I spent only 5 minutes each time in the car park and there was a clear 3 hours difference between the two journeys.  Unfortunately I have no video evidence that the vehicle actually moved although Google does say I drove from Sainsbury's and I met my friend at Brierley Hill and so he knows I was there with my vehicle at the time Horizon are claiming I was parked on their land in Kidderminster.

The only thing is I'm autistic and it's quite stressful that I don't know whether or not this firm will accept my appeal, and if they don't I'd have to then take it up with POPLA which taking it up with POPLA means the fine would then go up to £70.

The firm has said it takes 35 days to process an appeal which is ridiculous to have to wait stressing for 35 days about whether or not I have to pay this firm £40 just for shopping twice in Sainsbury's in one day.

The car park in Sainsbury's used to actually have a physical person going round checking the cars but now they've gone to this ANPR system.  I have wondered though what actually happens if the ANPR camera does miss a car leaving as I know ANPR isn't fully foolproof and my vehicle has a well lit reg plate, printed to the official standard even with the official font and EU GB flag - well now I know.  I have a feeling that what happened in my case is that in Sainsbury's there is two exits to the car park, one is an exit and entrance which you can quite clearly see the ANPR cameras on, but the other is an exit only and from what I can see doesn't have ANPR cameras on that exit.  That night I chose the exit only exit as at present my car has a slight fault with power steering and that exit is more straighter than the main entrance and exit, but regardless I would presume that if your going to put ANPR cameras on a car park you'd put ANPR cameras on all exits.

I went to Brierley Hill that night to see Knightmare Live, the show was great but the stress that this has caused thanks to Sainsbury's has spoilt all of that and I'm surprised that Lord Sainsbury who has a daughter with Aspergers can't see why such a situation of accusing someone in this way with Aspergers would stress them out.

Offline The Bald Eagle

  • Administrator
  • Follower
  • *****
  • Posts: 4285
  • THE lowest common denominator
Re: Proof that ANPR cameras in car parks don't work
« Reply #146 on: 22 March, 2018, 10:36:02 AM »
#117

Contact Sainsburys mate and tell them that if they don't put it right you will be contacting your local press. And if Sainsburys say it's out of their hands and you need to go through the appeals process, contact the press and tell your story exactly how you said it on here.

This is yet another case of being guilty until proven innocent, something that only happens in the parking industry. It's disgraceful that anyone is put through this process. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you think we can help.

We have some experts on here who I'm sure would love to give Horizon and Sainsburys a very hard time if they insist on prolonging this process unnecessarily.  :-ev-:

======================================================


I have just received a parking fine from an ANPR system they have at Sainsbury's in Kidderminster.

Again like so many others this system has clearly got it wrong

The night in question I went to Brierley Hill Civic centre to see Knightmare Live.  On my way there I popped into Sainsbury's for some sweets and drinks for the show.

I then carried on driving to Brierley Hill to watch the show.  3 1/2 hours later I returned back via Kidderminster to Ludlow, stopping at Sainsbury's to do a bit of food shopping and get some petrol.  I wanted to get some frozen food shopping and didn't want it to defrost whilst at the show.

The parking restrictions were no return within 2 hours.

For some reason their system must have missed my reg plate on the initial exit, although I still don't understand why the system isn't setup that it checks plates on entry for those already in the car park, if it did this then it could have worked out that if a reg plate that is currently in the car park has reentered the car park then clearly that vehicle left the car park and for some reason the ANPR missed it on the exit.  I work in computers and it's not that hard to program and check unless the obvious reason is to deliberately scam motorists with fake tickets (not to mention also illegally retrieving motorists details from DVLA due to their faulty system)

Thankfully for me though I had Google maps turned on at the time and that has monitored my entire journey which proves I spent only 5 minutes each time in the car park and there was a clear 3 hours difference between the two journeys.  Unfortunately I have no video evidence that the vehicle actually moved although Google does say I drove from Sainsbury's and I met my friend at Brierley Hill and so he knows I was there with my vehicle at the time Horizon are claiming I was parked on their land in Kidderminster.

The only thing is I'm autistic and it's quite stressful that I don't know whether or not this firm will accept my appeal, and if they don't I'd have to then take it up with POPLA which taking it up with POPLA means the fine would then go up to £70.

The firm has said it takes 35 days to process an appeal which is ridiculous to have to wait stressing for 35 days about whether or not I have to pay this firm £40 just for shopping twice in Sainsbury's in one day.

The car park in Sainsbury's used to actually have a physical person going round checking the cars but now they've gone to this ANPR system.  I have wondered though what actually happens if the ANPR camera does miss a car leaving as I know ANPR isn't fully foolproof and my vehicle has a well lit reg plate, printed to the official standard even with the official font and EU GB flag - well now I know.  I have a feeling that what happened in my case is that in Sainsbury's there is two exits to the car park, one is an exit and entrance which you can quite clearly see the ANPR cameras on, but the other is an exit only and from what I can see doesn't have ANPR cameras on that exit.  That night I chose the exit only exit as at present my car has a slight fault with power steering and that exit is more straighter than the main entrance and exit, but regardless I would presume that if your going to put ANPR cameras on a car park you'd put ANPR cameras on all exits.

I went to Brierley Hill that night to see Knightmare Live, the show was great but the stress that this has caused thanks to Sainsbury's has spoilt all of that and I'm surprised that Lord Sainsbury who has a daughter with Aspergers can't see why such a situation of accusing someone in this way with Aspergers would stress them out.
WE ARE WATCHING YOU

Offline The Bald Eagle

  • Administrator
  • Follower
  • *****
  • Posts: 4285
  • THE lowest common denominator
Re: Proof that ANPR cameras in car parks don't work
« Reply #147 on: 23 March, 2018, 11:44:09 AM »
Horizon dropped the case, but Darren (The KLF99) has a decent tip to counter the double dipping scam perpetrated on him and many others (via ParkingCowboys' website).

===========================================

https://www.parkingcowboys.co.uk/2018-03-double-dip-location-tracking/

A clever tip to prove you didn’t ‘double dip’

Posted on March 22, 2018 by Parking Cowboys — No Comments ↓
From: Darren


Hi,

I notice that you have some bits on your site about “Double Dipping” and some advise that might help people who have had this scam tried.

I recently was double dipped in Sainsbury’s in Kidderminster. I went to get some sweets before going to see a show in Brierley Hill.

Later on I returned to Sainsbury’s (totally after the “no return period”) to do some food shopping.

I then received a parking ticket claiming I’d been in their parking bay for 3 1/2 hours (even when the show I was in 9 miles away was on – interesting concept).

Initially I thought to myself well how on earth do I prove it – I went to a show and when I went to the show I didn’t stand outside taking pictures of my car because I didn’t anticipate Sainsbury’s trying to make out my car was still parked on their car park as that hadn’t entered my head.

Then I suddenly thought about a clever tool – I remember reading somewhere that if you have an android phone it monitors your location constantly and builds a map of where you’ve been.

Luckily I did have an android phone – and I found out that if you go to google.com/maps/timeline it shows you exactly where your phone went.

Really handy – from that I could get the time I arrived in the car park (which matched their time entrance time), and the time I left the first time and the time I went back and the time I left the second time (which matched their exit time).

I then found out that you can print this by pressing Ctrl+P and export it to a PDF – great now just forward it to both Sainsbury’s and the Horizon parking – two days later Horizon dropped the case.

It’s handy to look at if you think you haven’t got any proof you’ve made two visits to the same shop.

I just thought I’d share this with you so you can share this with other people using this site who may be in a similar position.


 

Hi Darren, thanks for writing in with this tip. The legal standard for deciding such cases in the county court is on the balance of probabilities. If you presented your evidence, and the parking company could not offer any further evidence, then on the balance of probabilites your defence should be upheld.
WE ARE WATCHING YOU

Offline The Bald Eagle

  • Administrator
  • Follower
  • *****
  • Posts: 4285
  • THE lowest common denominator
Re: Proof that ANPR cameras in car parks don't work
« Reply #148 on: 22 April, 2018, 12:45:53 PM »
#118 and #119

===================================


Below is a link to the BBC Watchdog programme broadcast last Wednesday, 18th April 2018.

Andrew Pester's (current BPA Ltd CEO) interview starts at about 8 minutes 40 seconds.

When questioned about the double dip/ANPR victims who feature in the preceding report he states (at 10 mins 47 secs) "...with any technology it's not 100%"

At 10 mins 32 secs "...where technology is involved it is often not 100% foolproof"

At 10 mins 48 secs "...errors do happen and lessons have to be learned"



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIaKMkO3YVM&feature=youtu.be

WE ARE WATCHING YOU

 


Supporters of the NoToMob

In order to view this object you need Flash Player 9+ support!

Get Adobe Flash player