bealine

Gatwick (South Terminal) MacDonalds by the Texaco filling station has always been a popular place for chauffeurs to hang out without paying huge parking charges whilst waiting for their arriving flights.

MacDiddlers are now strictly enforcing the 45 minute waiting limit by camera and just send a £125 bill to the Registered Keeper's address.

http://www.maidenbower.org.uk/forum/...=158265#158265

I don't know if this is entirely legal or not, but I would be really angry if this happened to me and I would definitely fight! If there is anyone who is a legal expert and can help please could they pm "Supergirl" !!!

Pyeinthesky

Shocking! I thought only the police and 'official' traffic enforcement officers had access to the vehiicle reg. database to get registered keepers addresses

BahrainLad

Surely this is McDonalds property and they can charge what they like for parking? How would you feel if someone came and parked in your front garden whilst avoiding paying car park fees?

BOH

I'm more concerned about a non-law enforcement agency having access to the registered address of the car owner.

PUCCI GALORE

Nice one. Methinks that a little infraction of the Data Protection Act may have been going on. Who exactly was sending this out? MacD. Texaco, or the BAA?

Pyeinthesky

Precisely, it's one thing getting clamped in an area where it's clearly signed what the parking rules are, but using the equivalent of a private GATSO to nab you by post is a very scary shift if you ask me.

Cargo Cult

From the DVLA:

References this page - which does list "unauthorised parking on private land" as a reasonable cause

I'm willing to bet that this facility is something that is relatively easy to exploit if you conjure up a sufficiently convincing story Time to re-register as a PO Box number?

James S

But would anyone seriously pay if Macca's sent them a bill for £125. Or £5 for that matter?

jchand

Has this sort of thing not been going on for a while in Asda . Tesco etc....

The Gvt / DVLA are happy to see the info..... They dont give a .... about us. we are just there to pay taxes pay fines etc...

The latest is road charging. That is going to bring in 28 billion a year ( and might do something about congestion). I thought I allready paid to use the road via road tax and the crazy tax on UK fuel/

aristoph

Nope. Happened before and seems to be legal under the Road Vehicles Regulations 2002. Doesn't look like Mr Ladyman's review changed this policy. http://www.publications.parliament.u...t/51214h02.htm

phillipas

Anyone who has 'reasonable cause' is able to obtain details of the registered keeper of a vehicle - i.e. McDonalds when a vehicle has failed to pay due parking charges.

http://direct.gov.uk/Motoring/Owning...066&chk=4gj8df

phreegreens

I was out and about in the car a few weeks ago and the McD's Gatwick situation was discussed at length.

It was quite a well researched piece, with legal input. Bottom line IIRC is you can get vehicle registered keeper data if you have "reasonable cause". There seems to have been some legal activity in the recent past, where the reasonable cause has been interpreted to mean parking enforcement by civil organisations is acceptable. Sounded pretty odd to me.

A quick look on the Information Commissioners site (who had someone on the radio segment) would indicate they are looking into this. Link here but it's a 10 page pdf, if you are that interested..!

Gaza

This has been happening for a while. Close to Reading station there is a private road that is used by people dropping off and picking up passengers. There are signs saying it is private property and anyone parking will be subject to a "Civil Penalty" of £XXX. The management company use cameras to record people waiting and send then the "civil penalty".

Unfortunatley there is no infingement of the DPA, although IMHO it should be seen as exactly that. McD probably contract with a parking company such as Central Parking Services to monitor the activity and issue the "fines."

There has been a lot about this in the press. While there are some reputable organisations that have access to the info there would be nothing to stop Savage, Pikey & Thug buying some land and operating it as a car park and then contacting the DVLA to obtain details car owners supposedly because they have not paid or overstayed where the real intention is to steal the car.

The change in the law has enabled companies such as NCP, Hospital Trusts, etc to operate "pay & Display" car parks as opposed to the traditional confined parking with access and exit by barrier. If they had no way of enforcing the charges as local councils do then anyone could park and not pay knowing full well the company had no way of tracing them. I suspect the legislation was intended to be used in this way but has been loosely interpreted to allow the abuse we now see and increase DVLA revenue.

Unless you wanted to end up in the Small Claims Court with a possible CCJ against you then you would have to pay. McDs would claim the conditions of parking are clearly displayed (45 minutes free, then £XXX for stays longer than that) and that therefore they are entitled to levy the charge if you stay longer than 45 minutes.

Having never been that that McDs I have no idea how much inconvenience is caused to other customers by people hogging the parking bays for an excessive amount of time having purchased an 80p cup of coffee.

I suspect that there will be a legal challenge to the DVLAs right to disclose the information to all and sundry; however, until that comes about we have to be aware that we live in a country that has more CCTV camera per head than anywhere else in the world.

phreegreens

I used to work next to the McD's on the Bath Road at LHR. They put up entry barriers there maybe 3-4 years ago, as Mr Limo Man and his mates all used to congregate there, drinking their 80p coffee and blocking all the spaces. Some didn't even have the good manners to buy a coffee, they just used the free parking space and the loo.

McD's have got a business to run and it ain't about providing free car parking.

The Saint

But what they have not considered is that the registered keeper may not have been the driver at the time. Only the driver at the time is liable to potential civil liability. You need legislation to displace that liability onto the registered keeper or to provide a mechanism whereby the registered keeper is obliged to provide the details of the driver at the time of the offence.

So, if you get a note in the post from McGonads claiming a "civil penalty" (there is no such thing), then if you were not the driver at the time (or cannot remember who was driving) you can send them back a letter wishing them luck in tracking that person down.