09-16-2026, 01:06 PM
@Foxy01 — Horizon admits its ANPR evidence falsely converted two separate visits into one 9½-hour stay; admits that its human review failed to prevent the resulting PCN; says such failures are "mercifully rare" and only a "very small proportion" of movements; but refuses to disclose the data by which those assertions could be independently tested.
If you can be bothered taking it further, the next steps are:
The frustrating part is that Horizon has effectively admitted the system failed, cancelled the charge, then shut the door by labelling everything else "commercially sensitive" or outside the SAR. So if you want to push it, it now means dealing with the BPA and ICO rather than getting a straight answer from Horizon.
If you can be bothered taking it further, the next steps are:
- a BPA complaint, focusing on the admitted double-dip failure, the ineffective pre-issue review, the unexplained change from two missing movements to "an ANPR capture" being missed, and Horizon's unsupported claims about how rare these failures supposedly are; and
- a separate ICO complaint, limited to whether Horizon actually carried out a reasonable search for images of the vehicle itself, rather than merely searching records associated with the correct VRM.
The frustrating part is that Horizon has effectively admitted the system failed, cancelled the charge, then shut the door by labelling everything else "commercially sensitive" or outside the SAR. So if you want to push it, it now means dealing with the BPA and ICO rather than getting a straight answer from Horizon.
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience. - Mark Twain
