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

halibut2209

Guys, it's really not worth the effort feeding the trolls here.

RENEGADE_2

Flyboy152 wrote: »

So, we should just blindly ignore moronic arrogant gits who abuse disabled and parent and child parking bays?

I don't get your point. The contents of the forum and this thread pertain to the legal framework. Describing them as "moronic arrogant gits" is your personal view and cuts no ice in court. As for "blindly ignoring" abusers of P&C bays: whatever course of action exists to prevent such activities, the practice of issuing de facto penalties is NOT A LEGAL OPTION. That is what you need to drill into your own skull. We are here to advise motorists who have been hit with these illegal invoices and those who face systematic harassment in the weeks to come. This is not a haven where PPC-apologists convene to practise demagogy; your comments are not welcome.

halibut2209

Well played. I'm trying to help people on this forum. We get the occasional person in like people in this thread trying to undermine all the good work we do, and then you come up with something you've done which completely undermines everything.

For the record, flyboy, as RENEGADE stated I did indeed admonish him for deliberately parking in a disabled bay. And I am one of the "!!!!!" you talk about.

EDIT: Didn't realise m4fia was banned. I see now why you use code!

EDIT 2: Really should have quoted RENEGADE above seeing as he's now edited his post. He had a go at me for posting what I did above and quoted me having a go at him for deliberately parking in a disabled bay and saying that I hope he got stung for it. And that still stands. People that deliberately flout parking restrictions SHOULD get stung. And that's fair

But the PPCs don't act fair. They have no appeals procedure, and they frequently flout their own rules. That's the point of this forum.

MDBJ

Flyboy152 wrote: »

So, we should just blindly ignore moronic arrogant gits who abuse disabled and parent and child parking bays?

Aside from what I posted above one of the drivers behind the antipathy displayed by those against abuse of parent & child and disabled spaces - and the abusers - is that very natural, classic passive/aggressive dislike of those who jump queues.

As someone who is always last in line I entirely understand but what is worse, an annoying social snub or a gross abuse of the law?

I long ago learned to live with being last (it has its advantages - believe me) and can't get too exercised about things like misuse of a space but I do get annoyed when the law is abused and establishments one would otherwise expect to uphold it actually conspire at its ongoing breach.

RENEGADE_2

webby23 wrote: »

YES I did want that arrogant idiot in the Audi to pay £70 for breaking the parking rules in Asda

Maybe next time he will or will not think twice about taking up space he shouldnt be in.......

No sympathy at all for the arrogant amongst use who think themselves above the rules......

You obviously have no concept for rule of law. How about truncating the terms and conditions to have the driver's head blown off his shoulders with a Kalashnikov? Law doesn't matter does it? Let's just apply our own little rules everywhere.

Flyboy152

RENEGADE wrote: »

I don't get your point. The contents of the forum and this thread pertain to the legal framework. Describing them as "moronic arrogant gits" is your personal view and cuts no ice in court. As for "blindly ignoring" abusers of P&C bays: whatever course of action exists to prevent such activities, the practice of issuing de facto penalties is NOT A LEGAL OPTION. That is what you need to drill into your own skull. We are here to advise motorists who have been hit with these illegal invoices and those who face systematic harassment in the weeks to come. This is not a haven where PPC-apologists convene to practise demagogy; your comments are not welcome.

Your insistence that it wasn't Webby's business is a load of tosh. It is everyone's business to point these morons out.

Flyboy152

MDBJ wrote: »

Aside from what I posted above one of the drivers behind the antipathy displayed by those against abuse of parent & child and disabled spaces - and the abusers - is that very natural, classic passive/aggressive dislike of those who jump queues.

As someone who is always last in line I entirely understand but what is worse, an annoying social snub or a gross abuse of the law?

I long ago learned to live with being last (it has its advantages - believe me) and can't get too exercised about things like misuse of a space but I do get annoyed when the law is abused and establishments one would otherwise expect to uphold it actually conspire at its ongoing breach.

And yet there are far more abusers of family and disabled parking bays than there are of contract law. Where should our priorities really lie? If these abusers of parking bays didn't exist, there wouldn't be any need for a forum like this.

Flyboy152

RENEGADE wrote: »

You obviously have no concept for rule of law. How about truncating the terms and conditions to have the driver's head blown off his shoulders with a Kalashnikov? Law doesn't matter does it? Let's just apply our own little rules everywhere.

And you obviously have no concept of social justice or morals. I wonder which is worse?

RENEGADE_2

halibut2209 wrote: »

Well played. I'm trying to help people on this forum. We get the occasional person in like people in this thread trying to undermine all the good work we do, and then you come up with something you've done which completely undermines everything.

For the record, flyboy, as RENEGADE stated I did indeed admonish him for deliberately parking in a disabled bay. And I am one of the "!!!!!" you talk about.

EDIT: Didn't realise m4fia was banned. I see now why you use code!

EDIT 2: Really should have quoted RENEGADE above seeing as he's now edited his post. He had a go at me for posting what I did above and quoted me having a go at him for deliberately parking in a disabled bay and saying that I hope he got stung for it. And that still stands. People that deliberately flout parking restrictions SHOULD get stung. And that's fair

But the PPCs don't act fair. They have no appeals procedure, and they frequently flout their own rules. That's the point of this forum.

I don't hide the original edit but I retract the comments. I originally thought it was aimed at me trolling and it then occurred to me that when I first joined, I found the "hope you get stung" remark abrupt and hostile.

I've said it several times, I have not since that time touched a disabled bay and I shall not in future. The remark you made also declared that "this is why we have PPCs in the first place". I can say with great confidence that this is not so. Only these past two weeks I have made sharp observations; when a motorist gets himself a private PCN albeit on purpose, it surmises two things - a) the PPC is already active, b) the landowner approves and milks the same scam. Now just before I joined, two supermarkets in the vicitinty opened. Long before they were open to the public and the first driver abused their terms, the warning signs were already erected and the carparks were partolled by an officer and his equipment from Day 1, Second 1. So even before anyone could drive onto the property, Europarks (active in both) were turning cartwheels in having secured the contract for these stores over other potential rivals - to them, it is a game.

By the same token, I have observed COUNTLESS private carparks from friendlier companies and smaller ventures which advise "staff only" or something similar and there is not a single ominous sign aspiring to bully unwelcome drivers. Surprisingly, this is even within the compound where I got the Parkforce ticket (subject of my seminal post - NOT for disabled but for permit holder issue). The same complex has a section devoted to Wilkinson manned by nobody and with no threatening messages. Similarly, close to my place of work - an area shrouded with signage - is a children's playgroup with a smll carpark and no unfriendly signage. Never would I abuse these facilities and it seems nobody else does. As the Dutch say: Wie goed doet, goed ontmoet (lit. who does good, receives good).:T

RENEGADE_2

Flyboy152 wrote: »

And you obviously have no concept of social justice or morals. I wonder which is worse?

If you wish to have the law changed, go to your MP, have the Unfair Contract Term Act 1977 repealed, have the other Contract Law terms thrown out the window and all will become legal THEN you'll have a point.