MSE news: The £95 parking ticket for taking too long to spend

hollydays

Did the person not contact the Manager in the first instance?

MSE_Martin

A fine is defined by the dictionary is "a sum of money imposed as a penalty for an offense or dereliction". And that's exactly what happened here.

Your point is of course that these LEGALLLY are not fines, but this isn't a legal document, its a short news story aiming to get the story across quickly. The facts these fines have no legal basis, doesn't stop them being referable too as fines in common parlance.

The entire point of the piece is the fine was outrageous and lacked any authority, but that' doesn't stop it being what's referred to as a fine. Even the person who got the ticket says in it, "Also, the fact they lay out their letters to make them look like official fines in order to dupe susceptible, law-abiding people should be stopped."

In journalism when you write, you try and not repeat words, its clumsy style and stops people reading and thus synonyms are important, the use of the term fine is perfectly correct and appropriate in the piece - its an emotive word and used to heighten the sense of injustice.

Equally you could say the use of

"His crime?"

is legally incorrect, there was no crime this is a civil contractual dispute and not criminal, but again it is common parlance and a perfectly legitimate way to write a story of this type.

The article explains clearly,

"Many tickets issued by private firms are unenforceable and in many cases should be ignored, as explained in the Private Parking Ticket guide. "

As for it being a missed opportunity, don't worry this is a small news piece, when we go large it will be with the big main guide. It's been on the site six months, but never in the weekly email yet (due to scheduling) but it will soon and will be very prominent.

Please don't get too bogged down in the terminology and focus on the story.

(FORGIVE TYPOS USING SPEECH DICTATION FOR RSI)

sarahg1969

The problem is, if you refer to them as fines, then anyone who reads the article will assume they are fines. And people are scared of being fined.

Why not add to the piece the fact that they aren't fines? It's no good saying people have been fined, but the fines aren't enforceable, because a lot of people won't understand that. They see the word fine, and that's what grabs them.

I disagree that the use of the word fine is appropriate. I believe it misleads the reader.

setmefree2

Wow - what a disgrace and how horrible for the shopper!

MSE_Martin

sarahg1969 wrote: »

The problem is, if you refer to them as fines, then anyone who reads the article will assume they are fines. And people are scared of being fined.

Why not add to the piece the fact that they aren't fines? It's no good saying people have been fined, but the fines aren't enforceable, because a lot of people won't understand that. They see the word fine, and that's what grabs them.

I disagree that the use of the word fine is appropriate. I believe it misleads the reader.

As a compromise we'll add in a quote from me.


"While private parking tickets are often referred to as fines, actually they're no such thing, they're simply a company trying to use contract law to try and impose an additional charge - often they have no right to do so, and there's no basis in law for it.

Its time for a clamp down on these clampers, and the best way is for everyone to know their rights, if you get one of these tickets, don't just 'pay up'. Read through the {private parking reclaim guide} and if you think you've been hard done by, fight it."

magyar

MSE_Martin wrote: »

As a compromise we'll add in a quote from me.


"While private parking tickets are often referred to as fines, actually they're no such thing, they're simply a company trying to use contract law to try and impose an additional charge - often they have no right to do so, and there's no basis in law for it.

Its time for a clamp down on these clampers, and the best way is for everyone to know their rights, if you get one of these tickets, don't just 'pay up'. Read through the {private parking reclaim guide} and if you think you've been hard done by, fight it."

I think that's a fair compromise, but Sarah's right above, Martin. Whilst I agree completely that certain things are 'common parlance', many of us who deal with the media frequently tear our hair our when they get certain things wrong - just because it often perpetuates a myth.

For example, wouldn't you argue that three or four years ago people 'just accepted' that it was right to pay bank charges just because they were written that way in a contract?

The power of this site is amazing: let's use it!

davefb

A friend was 'fined' 80 pounds after shopping at sainsbury. it's a 'combined' parking area with the supermarket and maybe 8 other shops on the area. She spent over the 2hrs in the area, so got a ticket.
it utterly beggers belief, the signs are tiny and you assume they are for people not shopping on the area. she hadn't spent 400 pounds, 'only' perhaps 100.
My understanding is that even after complaining they refused to back down ( i guess they subcontract to some cowboys?). Then again, because the site is 'close' to the town center, people do park on it and not shop there, so you can see the dilema the companies have. However to give a ticket to anyone who has spent their time on that site ( wether they buy anything or not) is frankly rediculous.

peter_the_piper

davefb wrote: »

A friend was 'fined' 80 pounds after shopping at sainsbury. it's a 'combined' parking area with the supermarket and maybe 8 other shops on the area. She spent over the 2hrs in the area, so got a ticket.
it utterly beggers belief, the signs are tiny and you assume they are for people not shopping on the area. she hadn't spent 400 pounds, 'only' perhaps 100.
My understanding is that even after complaining they refused to back down ( i guess they subcontract to some cowboys?). Then again, because the site is 'close' to the town center, people do park on it and not shop there, so you can see the dilema the companies have. However to give a ticket to anyone who has spent their time on that site ( wether they buy anything or not) is frankly rediculous.

I think its best to look on these tickets a requests for money. If you think its a fair request then pay them, if not, don't. Tell them to continue ignoring the begging letter.

magyar

The problem is quite clear, it's the fact that the shops themselves don't exercise common sense.

Near where I live there is a shopping area which is 5 mins walk to the train station. Not surprisingly, it's common to see people using it rather than paying £5 to park at the station all day.

So I have no problem with ensuring that only bona fide shoppers use it for free, but clearly they have to exercise common sense. If someone stays for three hours and has till receipts from the store, how can any sensible store charge them?

stoneman

trisontana wrote: »

But why are even MSE calling this a "fine" when it isn't? I would have thought that anyone who works for MSE should have got the message now, and the fact that these "fines" are unenforceable. Parky must be rubbing his hands over this.

You really need to get out more. It's a news story!! As Martin has mentioned these phrases are used to heighten the stories impact, and according to definition is a correct word to use in the context of the piece. It beggars belief that people spend hours of their time for free bringing this site to us only for some to scrutinize every word to find ways of picking fault.