Bartholomew v. Parking Concepts, Inc.

Summary

The California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, Division Five, held that collecting and using license plate information without implementing and publicly making available the usage and privacy policy required by California’s Automated License Plate Recognition Law constitutes harm under that statute. The court reversed the demurrer ruling in part as to the ALPR claim, while affirming dismissal of the plaintiff’s Unfair Competition Law claim for failure to allege economic injury sufficient for standing. The opinion was certified for partial publication, with parts II and III excluded from publication.

Holdings

1. The complaint sufficiently alleged that Parking Concepts operated an ALPR system because the display of Bartholomew's license plate number on the entry ticket and exit kiosk reasonably supported an inference that an automated camera and computer program converted the plate image into computer-readable data stored in a searchable database.
2. A plaintiff need not allege measurable monetary damages to establish harm under the ALPR Law, but must allege more than the bare fact of a statutory violation.
3. An ALPR operator's collection and use of an individual's ALPR information without implementing and making publicly available the usage and privacy policy required by Civil Code section 1798.90.51 constitutes harm under the ALPR Law.
4. Bartholomew failed to allege the economic injury required for standing under the Unfair Competition Law because the alleged risk of identity theft, loss of value of personal information, and asserted unwillingness to pay for parking absent disclosure were too speculative.
5. The alleged open collection of ALPR information at a single parking-garage location, which customers could avoid by not parking there, was not a serious invasion of privacy as a matter of law.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the complaint sufficiently alleged that Parking Concepts operated an automated license plate recognition system.
2. Whether collecting and using a plaintiff's ALPR information without implementing and publicly providing the statutorily required usage and privacy policy constitutes harm under the ALPR Law.
3. Whether Bartholomew alleged sufficient economic injury to establish standing under the Unfair Competition Law.
4. Whether the alleged collection of ALPR information at a single parking garage constituted a serious invasion of privacy under the California Constitution.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded