As you can see, it's not very good.
It appears from this parking charge notice there was no just cause to access the DVLA for keeper data. The keeper should therefore consider a claim against ParkingEye for a breach of the data protection act. If they wish to do this they should start off with a letter before claim.
My name and address information (together with other information) is classified as personal data within the meaning of s1(1) of the Data Protections Act (DPA). You are misusing this data by attempting to claim a charge is do when no lawful reason exists. I refer you to your parking charge notice where there is no evidence the vehicle arrived at the time stated.
This is therefore a breach of data principle 1 (data must be used lawfully).
The case of Vidal-Hall v Google Inc  EWHC 13 (QB) provides authority that misuse of personal data is a tort and that damages may be non-pecuniary. The case of Halliday v Creation Consumer Finance Ltd  All ER (D) 199 provides authority that a reasonable sum for compensation would be £750.
The case of VCS v Phillip, claim number C9DP2D6C Liverpool 07/12/2016, while not binding, concerns a motorist sent a parking charge which was not valid. The judge awarded £250 for a DPA breach. This is therefore a persuasive case that a DPA breach occurs when a parking charge is not legitimately pursued, and that a sum of at least £250 is compensation for pursuing a purported parking charge when there is no reasonable prospect of success.
Please therefore remit the sum of £250 to myself 14 days. I will accept this sum in full and final compensation for the matter. I reserve the right to take legal action without further notice if this amount is not paid.
I am willing to use alternative dispute resolution to attempt to settle this dispute and suggest the Consumer Ombudsman is a suitable body
The Parking Prankster