ASDA confirm that they get share of all revenue got from TCP's PCNs

trisontana

Flyboy152 wrote: »

I am pretty sure that has been the excuse since the time parking tickets were invented. How can anyone make the mistake of parking in a space twice the width of a normal parking space, big blue signs, giant pictograms of a wheelchair and chevron markings all around the spaces. A "genuine" mistake; my backside.

Do you know of that particular disabled bay. Are you sure it's got adequate signage? If it was at night how was the lighting? what was the condition of the bay marking?

trisontana

Flyboy152 wrote: »

In other words we can all park in disabled bays and tell them all to beggar off. What a wonderful moralless world you lot live in.

But not as bad as the PPC's moral world where they try and con people into paying up with pretend legal documents, and empty threats of CCJs and bailiffs.

Flyboy152

trisontana wrote: »

Do you know of that particular disabled bay. Are you sure it's got adequate signage? If it was at night how was the lighting? what was the condition of the bay marking?

Oh please, you really are scraping the barrel, aren't you. I would have thought the fact that the space was twice the width, would have made even the stupid amongst us (present company excepted of course) realise it wasn't a normal parking space.

You can make as many excuses as you like, it still remains that you condone parking in disabled bays, when there is no entitlement. No matter how many times you try to make excuses and offer dumb platitudes, you cannot escape that fact. To make the excuse that it is acceptable to park in a disabled bay, because you think that the supermarket create them to raise revenue is reprehensible, at best.

Coupon-mad

Flyboy152 wrote: »

Oh please, you really are scraping the barrel, aren't you. I would have thought the fact that the space was twice the width, would have made even the stupid amongst us (present company excepted of course) realise it wasn't a normal parking space.

You can make as many excuses as you like, it still remains that you condone parking in disabled bays, when there is no entitlement. No matter how many times you try to make excuses and offer dumb platitudes, you cannot escape that fact. To make the excuse that it is acceptable to park in a disabled bay, because you think that the supermarket create them to raise revenue is reprehensible, at best.

What are you on?!

No-one thinks the Supermarkets create disabled bays to to raise revenue. We know that the Supermarkets create these bays to comply with the Equality Act 2010. Shame you appear not to have heard of it.

Trouble is, the Supermarkets think they've complied with the law then along comes a PPC prat, promising a nice protection racket 'we'll sort out your car park problems for free mate and we'll even give you some money to donate to your favourite cause'. But of course, unbeknown to the Supermarket who think they have engaged a legit 'business' to 'police the car park' in fact the only thing on all PPCs' agenda is MONEY and they haven't even heard of the Equality Act, couldn't give a stuff about legalities. So they proceed to farm the car parks, preying upon customers and then sending debt collector letters, combining unlawful wording with harassment. Poor mugs think it's a real ticket and pay up - even disabled people who had every right to park there.

Of course we are never going to tell someone who admits they parked in a disabled bay to pay the parasites who leach off the real business/landowner. The PPCs are running a third party money-making scam and have suffered no loss whatsoever.

Two wrongs don't make a right - and why the heck would we tell people to pay criminals such as OPC and the like?

Flyboy152

Coupon-mad wrote: »

What are you on?!

No-one thinks the Supermarkets create disabled bays to to raise revenue. We know that the Supermarkets create these bays to comply with the Equality Act 2010. Shame you appear not to have heard of it.

Trouble is, the Supermarkets think they've complied with the law then along comes a PPC prat, promising a nice protection racket 'we'll sort out your car park problems for free mate and we'll even give you some money to donate to your favourite cause'. But of course, unbeknown to the Supermarket who think they have engaged a legit 'business' to 'police the car park' in fact the only thing on all PPCs' agenda is MONEY and they haven't even heard of the Equality Act, couldn't give a stuff about legalities. So they proceed to farm the car parks, preying upon customers and then sending debt collector letters, combining unlawful wording with harassment. Poor mugs think it's a real ticket and pay up - even disabled people who had every right to park there.

Of course we are never going to tell someone who admits they parked in a disabled bay to pay the parasites who leach off the real business/landowner. The PPCs are running a third party money-making scam and have suffered no loss whatsoever.

Two wrongs don't make a right - and why the heck would we tell people to pay criminals such as OPC and the like?

Really?

trisontana wrote: »

Don't forget that the blue badge scheme does not apply to private car-parks. So this is a made -up rule by the parking company.

Stop making excuses for others' lack of morals.

esmerobbo

Anyone who is lazy, immoral, disrespectful, selfish enough to use a disabled bay, or parent and child bay when they are not entitled too, in my opinion deserves to be penalised.

The penalties need to be regulated somehow,and not left to private companies. If it was done the same way as a council PCN, I and I think most others here would not have a problem.

However it brings the same problem again you can be disabled and not have a blue badge. Now if the Supermarket make it a condition that you must have a blue badge to park in a disabled bay. It could be them breaking the law by not complying with the equality act.

The whole problem is PPC's are using the disabled bay as a way of justifying their charges. Look at UKCPS their last few court cases have been against disabled bay abuse. [Except one which they lost] They are simply using the emotional aspect of disabled bay abuse to justify their charges. Also if you think about it, if they did go to court a Judge may take a dislike to someone who abuses disabled bays.

I don't think many here believe anyone should be able to park anywhere they like. Or abuse someone else's private property. However I don't think you will find many who agree that a private company should be able enforce the situation without compulsory regulation.

trisontana

In Scotland there is provision for councils to take over the monitoring of BB spaces on private land. This only happens if the land owner/ supermarket requests it. So far there has been minimal take-up of this scheme. Could this be becuase the PPCs and supermarkets don't want to lose their nice little earner?

trisontana

So the best idea would be to follow the Scotland example, but take it one stage further and make it compulsory for all disabled places to be monitored by the council.

A word to our "critics". We are not pro disabled bay abusers, we are anti-PPCs and the way they try and con money out of people. There is a vast difference in that

SodG24

Flyboy152 wrote: »

You can make as many excuses as you like, it still remains that you condone parking in disabled bays, when there is no entitlement. No matter how many times you try to make excuses and offer dumb platitudes, you cannot escape that fact. To make the excuse that it is acceptable to park in a disabled bay, because you think that the supermarket create them to raise revenue is reprehensible, at best.

OK, as clearly you can't be bothered to search my posts here's a clear and unequivocal statement for you :

I do not condone nor agree with people parking in disabled or P&C bays unless they have have a genuine need to use them.

Equally I not condone nor agree with PPCs breaking or mis-representing the law.

So now I've made that perfectly clear, are you actually going to answer a question directly or continue to winge about some imaginary m@fia ? So here's you question :

Why do you think it is acceptable for PPCs to break the law and also the attempt to mis-represent the law ?

I won't hold my breath for a sensible constructive answer as you've continually failed to provide a coherent answer in your previous posts.

Anti-Asda-and-TCP

I have just sent an email to the BBC Watchdog programme (and CC'd the ASDA CEO) regarding ASDA appearing to condone the scamming activities of PPCs and also getting revenue out of it. The email also contained all of my email correspondence with the ASDA CEO, which I have exchanged with him over the last few weeks.