A DRIVER has shone a light on a terrifying bit of tech after receiving a surprise $100 parking fine in the mail following a trip to the movies.
The blindsided motorist “thought it was a total scam” when the penalty notice arrived, but was left facing the far more unsettling reality.
A driver was left stunned when he received a $100 parking fine despite not even knowing he had to pay[/caption]
Chicago native Spencer was baffled last year when he was slapped with a fine in connection with parking at the Regal City North Cinema.
The theatre allegedly stopped charging for parking during the pandemic after the lot attached to it had the electronic barrier at the exit destroyed by vandals.
Spencer claimed that he made one of his regular visits to the movies last March and left via the ungated exit as usual, only to find a demand for $100 in his mailbox days later.
The letter came from a multi-billion dollar enforcement company which, it soon transpired, had taken over the site a couple of months beforehand.S
The fuming driver told Slate that, despite the firm not making repairs to the parking lot, it had begun enforcing payments again.
And the exit barrier being out of action was no problem for them, as they made use of AI tech to catch drivers leaving the car park and trace their addresses.
This was done using Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) cameras.
Photographs taken by these cameras are then automatically cross-referenced with DMV records to find the address registered to the vehicle.
This practice is strictly regulated by the 1994 Driver’s Privacy Protection Act (DPPA), which was passed in reaction to the murder of Rebecca Schaeffer after her killer used her number plate to track her.
But critics claim that the law doesn’t go far enough and that government agencies and private companies can still access drivers’ personal data too readily.
In Spencer’s case, the company in question states in its privacy policy that it “does not connect the name of the owner of the vehicle with the license plate unless specifically authorized or submitted by the owner of the vehicle.”
But he alleged that no such permission was given and yet he was still handed the fine, which was actually addressed by name to his wife as the registered keeper of the vehicle.
His concerns were echoed by digital privacy attorney Lee Tien, who believes the DPPA to be insufficient.
He said: “It’s an old law that is very, very hard to work with.
“It tries to protect people but doesn’t do a great job of it.
“There are a lot of exceptions in it.
“What we have seen over the years is that those exceptions get read very broadly.”
The problem has now become so high-profile that the Illinois Secretary of State’s Office is examining potential solutions.
Deputy secretary Scott Burnham added: “Congress needs to reform and update the DPPA law to reduce those loopholes and do a better job of safeguarding sensitive information.
“The DPPA passed in 1994, you know, the internet was in its infancy.
“But fast-forward to today, those conveniences and connections come with a price, meaning it puts our privacy and personal information at risk in a manner that would have been unthinkable three decades ago.”
