Legion Group PCN

rjustice

Sirdan wrote: »

Might I suggest that you ignore Flyboy from now on ..I know I shall be.

Best thing to do, he seems a rather sad person.

Thanks again for your advice, all the best.

Tilt

Flyboy152 wrote: »

So, why did she park in a space she knew was meant for disabled people? What moral justification did she apply, to exempt herself from her responsibility, to not use a space she had no need for and that would have prevented someone using it, who really did need it?

According to the OP the nursery to which the bays were allocated for, was closed. The health/fitness centre which also had disabled bays, was open. IMHO, the OP's wife has shown some consideration by choosing to park in the less-likely place where she causes inconvienience. The PPC (as with all of them) would actually prefer more people like the OP's wife to park in 'restricted' bays even if they are unlikely to be used. the reason for this is obvious so they can slap a disproportinate charge on the windscreen and make money.

The OP has come on here for advice and I can't see much comming from you, all you seem to want to do is pass judgement and correctly if i'm wrong but that isn't what this forum is all about. Its a private car park where a PPC who have no legal powers preys on motorists who are ignorant of that fact. They don't give a toss about whether a disabled person can park or not, they are just interested in the revenue they can earn.

Flyboy152

Tilt wrote: »

According to the OP the nursery to which the bays were allocated for, was closed.

The health/fitness centre which also had disabled bays, was open. IMHO, the OP's wife has shown some consideration by choosing to park in the less-likely place where she causes inconvienience.

According to the OP the spaces were for the whole park, not just for the nursery. She therefore used a spaces that,a s far as she believed at the time, had been allocated as a disabled bay. If she had believed that the spaces were for the sole use of the nursery, she knew that it was private property and that she should not have parked there.

The PPC (as with all of them) would actually prefer more people like the OP's wife to park in 'restricted' bays even if they are unlikely to be used. the reason for this is obvious so they can slap a disproportinate charge on the windscreen and make money.

Isn't it odd that throughout this the OP hasn't mentioned how much his wife has been charged. If they were asking for a disproportionate amount of money, I might have some sympathy for him, but I rather suspect that it is a reasonable amount. If they were sending intimidating letters and had thuggish collectors banging on the door, I might have advised him to go to the police. But I doubt they are doing this either.

The OP has come on here for advice and I can't see much comming from you, all you seem to want to do is pass judgement and correctly if i'm wrong but that isn't what this forum is all about. Its a private car park where a PPC who have no legal powers preys on motorists who are ignorant of that fact. They don't give a toss about whether a disabled person can park or not, they are just interested in the revenue they can earn.

But the business owners who contract the parking control company have a right to protect their property for their own use and for the use of their customers. They specifically allocate parking for disabled drivers, who have reduced mobility so that hey have less to walk than those who are fit and able, as was the OPs wife. Her reluctance to use other parking facilities was her decision. Why should they be penalised by lost custom and inconvenience to their customers because a selfish few. If the OP is after advice, then the advice I would give is to counsel his wife to have more consideration for others.

Flyboy152

Sirdan wrote: »

Might I suggest that you ignore Flyboy from now on ..I know I shall be.

rjustice wrote: »

Best thing to do, he seems a rather sad person.

Thanks again for your advice, all the best.

Aah, yes the usual MSE final resort; if you can't get people to agree to your point of view, insult and berate, who knows, they might be too scared to respond. :wall:

Coupon-mad

The amount will not be 'reasonable', PPC charges are always between £50 and £120 - the top end of which is more than a real Council ticket. Reasonable would be a fiver, you'd pay and have done with it wouldn't you (maybe...:p)!

And we can bet the PPC WILL be sending threatening letters - as happens in almost every case - and the Police take no interest as it's just a civil matter to them. But the OfT and MP and Trading Standards may take an interest because in reality, harassment is a criminal matter:

http://www.nationaldebtline.co.uk/england_wales/factsheet.php?page=03_harassment

No-one here has said it's OK to take up any disabled spaces when the physical need is not there. Morally I never park there and nor do many other posters here. But if on a single occasion the OP's wife unwittingly parked there thinking it was the best place and believing the spaces were not in use when the nursery was closed then it's not a crime! It's just an error of judgement and I bet she will now think twice in future. Who are we to criticise her? And most certainly, who are the PPC to attempt to 'fine' her?

Well they are not allowed to fine anyone - any more than I can for reading this post - so they can just swivel. OP, just ignore the PPC and ignore Flyboy152 who methinks doth protest too much...:p