IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including QR codes, number plates and reference numbers.
Tesco to get blue badge info from dvla
Comments
-
I didn't answer the question as the person was antagonising me. But I do need a disabled bay and haven't had many problems in the past. But this new system seems to be where i wont know whether i receive a PCN or not because it wont be attached to the car and that causes me worry. Normally i leave a note on dashboard stating i have a disability and need the space.
You have no need to worry. If you ever did get a PCN, you would come here and we would help you beat it.I married my cousin. I had to...I don't have a sister.
All my screwdrivers are cordless."You're Safety Is My Primary Concern Dear" - Laks0 -
Thanks to everyone for the replies.
I have informed tesco that I need the disabled bays. Will wait and see what their response is.0 -
This will be interesting. If they ask for reasons then be as open as you are comfortable with, in proving your need.Thanks to everyone for the replies.
I have informed tesco that I need the disabled bays. Will wait and see what their response is.
If they then refuse...well I would think this would be worth suing over to focus their mind because it would be hard to deny a provision to someone who had a proven need and took time out to show the proof and ask for the offer of closer bays to be extended to include them. Tesco would only have to come up with a pass for you, or add you to the White list at certain stores you use.
Perfectly reasonable for them to make an adjustment for 'other' people who need a special bay, on a case by case basis - certainly to give you the right to take a Parent & Child Bay would be a simple step which would not be ousting any other disabled person.
What really annoys me is the way soooo many old blokes (and it is mainly old men) think they 'own' the disabled bays and yet you see them shopping and moving around as sprightly as anyone else, day in, day out. One wonders how some of the oldies 'pass' the test with their GP and convince them they can't walk the requisite number of metres.
Having worked in Disability Advice myself in the past, I make no apology for that observation.
Even worse of course are people who abuse Blue Badges by borrowing one or using one belonging to a dead relative. Of course Tesco would think those cars are OK...because all Tesco want to see is the Badge, not the individual person and need. That is where they are wrong.
Let's see if they see that and if they don't I would be referring their reply to the EHRC for advice.PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
CLICK at the top of this/any page where it says:
Forum Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD0 -
Having contacted tesco on this matter they are saying the disabled bays are for blue badge holders only and only for people with physical disabilities. They are completely ignoring the Equality Act and saying to take it up with the council.
They are saying that people with mental health problems who need the bays cannot park there.
Despite being told that Blue Badge scheme is for Council car parks and highways only.
They say because other retailers do this so they will do this and that it is not illegal.
They say to discuss the situation with customer service desk in store.
Also was told that physical disabilities have more priorities than mental disabilities.
If i receive any PCN i will challenge them and make tesco compensate me for many additional distress caused by the situation. I advice others to do the same. Don't let them bully you.
Tesco haven't properly researched the implications of their flawed scheme.
Several comments have been posted on their parking blog about non blue badge disability under the Equality Act.
https://www.tescoplc.com/news/blog/topics/protecting-blue-badge-disabled-parking/
One way of complying with the EA would be to allocate additional spaces close to the store entrance/exit for those without blue badges who meet EA criteria, like Annoyed1.
By all means put up additional signs asking the able-bodied not to abuse the disabled bays and hopefully decent drivers will comply.
What Tesco must not do is allow their parking policy to discriminate against those who have a legal right to expect reasonable adjustments to be made to help them.
Hopefully every little (suggestion) helps.0 -
All very interesting, but whereas rhis forum has previously reported losses at POPLA and possibly court for people parking in disabled bays without a BB, I have not read of one successful case where a non BB holder has obtained a judgement under EA in reverse.
I am not disagreeing with the sentiments on here at all, but suggesting if people are going into ice-breaking territory, there should be an advisory. If I am wrong about precedents, then I apologise in advance.0 -
Old POPLA, (London Councils), said many times that they wouldn't rule on the EA2010; and I'm assuming that new POPLA are working on the same basis..All very interesting, but whereas rhis forum has previously reported losses at POPLA and possibly court for people parking in disabled bays without a BB, I have not read of one successful case where a non BB holder has obtained a judgement under EA in reverse.0 -
Old POPLA, (London Councils), said many times that they wouldn't rule on the EA2010; and I'm assuming that new POPLA are working on the same basis..
Correct - they are a parking appeal service. They, therefore, tell you to take those issues to the proper place and rule on your liability for breach of contract.
I apologise for copying the old POPLA (and they were better than the current alternatives) Head Adjudicator's report in 2015. This clarifies the situation and can be summarised "Got an EA issue? Take it elsewhere, we can't deal with it". I know it comes under Hospitals, but I contend each of the cases in the report are of a higher significance than the current thread.
Hospitals
Charges for parking in hospitals in England may be another lively political issue but appeals at POPLA continue to be decided on the facts and the law as it stands at the time of the event.
In my first Report, I noted that we had few appeals arising out of parking charge notices issued to vehicles parked in hospital car parks and that they were, in the main, from staff rather than patients. I commented that this appeared to suggest a commendably proper approach by operators.
The following year we saw far more appeals from members of the public, either as patient or relative, often in very distressing circumstances. This position has continued. If the breach has occurred and all other requirements are met, all the Assessor can do is to refer the matter back to the operator.
Some operators have implied that hospitals want car park restrictions rigorously enforced and yet appellants may say that they have received a different story from the hospital concerned.
I will refer later to recommendations made by Assessors for the exercise of discretion but hospital cases, probably more than most, do require that operators step back from the bald facts and consider the whole picture. Here are some examples where the event occurred at a hospital car park and discretion was not exercised.
In one instance the appellant’s case was that he was suffering heart attack symptoms and drove to the emergency clinic but, being afraid of a possible collapse, he parked in the nearest parking bay which was a disabled bay and rushed to the clinic. The appellant was apparently kept overnight at the hospital and said he was wired to the monitoring machines and thus unable to move the vehicle and not discharged until the next morning. The appellant had provided a discharge letter from the hospital to support his case.
The Assessor referred the matter back to the operator, who rejected the appellant’s representations because, they said, by parking in a marked disabled bay without displaying a blue badge, the appellant had breached the terms and conditions of the parking contract and that by not being a blue badge holder, the appellant was not entitled to occupy a free charge blue-badge space.
Furthermore, the operator added, the appellant had driven himself to hospital, and presumably considered himself capable of driving safely and so, in their view, the appellant was therefore capable of parking in the paid car park directly adjacent to the free disabled bays.
In another appeal it was the appellant’s case that, as an obstetrician and gynaecologist he was attending a medical emergency at the hospital in the labour ward where the patient was bleeding very heavily after giving birth. It was, explained the appellant, crucial that he went back in urgently to save the woman’s life, having been called out of the Labour ward by the senior midwife when he saw that a patient from the Mental Health Unit was lying on top of his vehicle. Security officers were called who led the patient back to the Mental Health Unit.
The parking charge notice was apparently not received by the appellant as the patient may have taken it from the vehicle. Photographic evidence submitted also showed that a man was lying on top of the appellant’s vehicle with what appears to resemble a parking charge notice in his hand. After the individual was removed from the appellant’s vehicle it was moved into a designated parking bay. Further, on the same day, the appellant visited the operator’s office and was informed that no parking charge notice had been issued.
The operator declined to exercise discretion and said that the appellant’s vehicle was not parked correctly within a designated parking bay, that photographic evidence supported their contention that there was signage at the site to inform motorists of parking terms and conditions and that there was also photographic evidence to support that the appellant’s vehicle was not parked correctly within a designated parking bay.
Finally, in another hospital case the parking charge notice was issued because the vehicle was parked in an area designated for police only. The appellant explained he was helping with the return of a vulnerable patient who had ‘escaped’ from the emergency department of hospital. The appellant was instructed by the police to leave his vehicle in the police vehicle area and accompany the patient, as the appellant was able to calm the patient. Of course, in the statutory schemes acting at the direction of a police constable would amount to a complete ground of appeal.
However, although it appears that strictly the alleged breach occurred, the Assessor accepted the appellant’s evidence and found it consistent throughout. The Appellant had provided the name and number of the officer as well as the incident number.
The Assessor found compelling reasons why, in the particular circumstances of the case, the parking charge notice might properly be cancelled. Nevertheless, the operator responded indicating that it was not willing to cancel the charge, saying that the appellant had failed to provide sufficient evidence to convince the operator that the appellant’s story was true. The operator said that they would not consider cancelling the parking charge notice unless sufficient evidence ‘preferably directly from the police’ was produced................................
........................Earlier in this Report I have set out briefly some of the types of cases that are referred back to operators for them to consider exercising their discretion. It obviously remains a matter for them but the small number referred shows that Assessors only make such recommendations where there are compelling reasons to do so.0 -
Tesco haven't properly researched the implications of their flawed scheme.
Several comments have been posted on their parking blog about non blue badge disability under the Equality Act.
https://www.tescoplc.com/news/blog/topics/protecting-blue-badge-disabled-parking/
One way of complying with the EA would be to allocate additional spaces close to the store entrance/exit for those without blue badges who meet EA criteria, like Annoyed1.
By all means put up additional signs asking the able-bodied not to abuse the disabled bays and hopefully decent drivers will comply.
What Tesco must not do is allow their parking policy to discriminate against those who have a legal right to expect reasonable adjustments to be made to help them.
Hopefully every little (suggestion) helps.
The picture of the prominently displayed sign in the article actually says, disabled parking only, it doesn't mention the BB at all. So far so good. That means that disabled people who have protected characteristics under the EA 2010 can reasonably assume it is OK to park there. Why then are Tesco saying "only BB holders?"I married my cousin. I had to...I don't have a sister.All my screwdrivers are cordless."You're Safety Is My Primary Concern Dear" - Laks0 -
"Cat Parkinson" I did misread that first as Car Parkinson. :rotfl:
I'd rather be an Optimist and be proved wrong than a Pessimist and be proved right.0 -
And Tesco uses Horizon ???
Do Tesco really think they will keep customers if they involve
their customers in this sham ???
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/horizon-parking-youve-been-gladstoned.html0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards