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

Flyboy152

RENEGADE wrote: »

I'll tell you again. This is not a page for PPC-apologists. Your sort is not wanted here. If you wish to have the law changed, play the demagogue and cry your eyes out to your MP, have the Unfair Contract Term Act 1977 repealed, have the other Contract Law terms thrown out the window and all will become legal THEN you can make love to yourself over your achievement. For the time being, STOP proffering false cautions that an abuser needs to pay these demands which he DOESN'T.

Excuse me, I can post where the flip I like. Who died and made you the Lord and mighty of MSE?

I haven't advised anyone to pay anything. Please point to where I have.

Sirdan

Flyboy152 wrote: »

Excuse me, I can post where the flip I like. Who died and made you the Lord and mighty of MSE?

I haven't advised anyone to pay anything. Please point to where I have.

Yes you can post where you like ...but you will remain unwanted...stupid troll...:p

RENEGADE_2

Flyboy152 wrote: »

Excuse me, I can post where the flip I like. Who died and made you the Lord and mighty of MSE?

I haven't advised anyone to pay anything. Please point to where I have.

Flyboy - I say this with no bitter feeling towards you, and with no intention of offending you:
PPCs - for the purpose of these forums - are the sworn enemy. Everybody realises that rules are rules and breaches need to be met with some punitive measure, but it is not for rogues to go taking the law into their own hands and violating long-standing acts of Parliament and most of all harassing unsuspecting individuals as part of the process. This is why I say, DO lobby your MP, get him to challenge the PM on a Wednesday afternoon; gather some PPC canvassers and demonstrate outside Number 10. But don't expect widespread public support! Now for the time being, we are simply imparting the facts - legal facts - to the less aware.

Flyboy152

RENEGADE wrote: »

You are an apologist for Webby who in turn has more than "advised" someone to pay but has fratenised with the PPCs whom it appears your countenance.

In other words, you're nothing more than weak minded bulls..t

RENEGADE_2

Flyboy152 wrote: »

In other words, you're nothing more than weak minded bulls..t

No, I am a realist. I don't live up on Cloud Nine and it is not my job to prescribe laws on what should or should not be the case. I no longer approve of these abuses but you will not catch me alerting a Town & City agent with tears running down my face begging him to stick a ticket on the vehicle's window. Likewise, when someone has fallen victim to this illicit bullying campaign, I aim to help them overcome the ugly episode. What is weak-minded about that?

RENEGADE_2

halibut2209 wrote: »

. 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.

By the way, this is all self-contradictory. If being "stung" means being made to pay yet by your own admission the system isn't fair and it flouts its own rules, it seems you wish for a person with knowledge to end up having to pay somebody he knows he doesn't need to!

Doesn't make sense!

sarahg1969

MDBJ wrote: »

I would refer both sarahg1969 and webby to s.6 Equality Act 2010 - read by following the link - www. legislation. gov. uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/6. (minus the gaps - sorry I'm a Newbie and can't post links yet). It is perfectly feasible for a disabled person to fall within that definition and NOT be eligible for a blue badge - and I am one of them - especially since the revised guidelines published in February.

If you read the entire thread, you will see that I most certainly was NOT agreeing with webby. In fact, his statement was in response to mine where I said that not all disabled people have blue badges, and there is no obligation to have one.

Not only are there disabled people who have been turned down for a blue badge or are not eligible for one, but there are also those who don't have one just because they have not applied for one.

MDBJ

Flyboy152 wrote: »

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.

From a strictly moral point of view I do not disagree but one should never confuse morals and the law where the apparent lack of one is used to excuse or enable breaches of the other.

By all means decry abusers of reserved parking spaces but we should hasten from tacitly allowing private parking companies (amongst others) to openly flout the law simply because it assuages a not unnatural desire for retribution. The ends justify the means even if they are unlawful/illegal?

It is decidedly not just contract, and thus, common law that is being flouted. There are several statutes that these companies appear to either ignore entirely or cherry-pick the provisions they choose to adhere to. Sadly, those charged with the public duty of enforcing these laws are grossly under-resourced and oft-times lack the will to take the job on and this situation extends well beyond the realms of private parking.

As for your comment about this forum, I think you may have underestimated the extent of the private parking menace unless your comment was directed simply about this thread.

Flyboy152

MDBJ wrote: »

From a strictly moral point of view I do not disagree but one should never confuse morals and the law where the apparent lack of one is used to excuse or enable breaches of the other.

By all means decry abusers of reserved parking spaces but we should hasten from tacitly allowing private parking companies (amongst others) to openly flout the law simply because it assuages a not unnatural desire for retribution. The ends justify the means even if they are unlawful/illegal?

It is decidedly not just contract, and thus, common law that is being flouted. There are several statutes that these companies appear to either ignore entirely or cherry-pick the provisions they choose to adhere to. Sadly, those charged with the public duty of enforcing these laws are grossly under-resourced and oft-times lack the will to take the job on and this situation extends well beyond the realms of private parking.

As for your comment about this forum, I think you may have underestimated the extent of the private parking menace unless your comment was directed simply about this thread.

Thank you MDBJ for a balanced, well thought out and erudite post. It is refreshing to see someone who can engage in a adult debate, without resorting accusing those with opposing views of being employed by the parking industry, or worse.

I do not disagree with the main thrust of your remarks. I abhor the tactics that some parking companies resort to, to extract money out of people. But, my point on this thread has been one of support for those who struggle every day with mobility issues, but have to either abandon or curtail shopping trips, or just struggle on, because some selfish twit has parked in a bay, to which they were not entitled and comes on a internet forum to whine about getting caught and then have people tell them that they shouldn't bother feeling any kind of moral responsibility, because the bays are only way for the supermarket to extort money out of them.

As a parent of disabled child, I know how important it is to be able to park close to the entrance of a supermarket, safe in the knowledge that any risks inherent with being in car park are greatly reduced, by the shorter distance to safety.

Coupon-mad

But have you actually read MDBJ's very good first post on this thread? Where he/she says that they are entitled to park in a disabled bay but have had to have long discussions with the Supermarket manager to be 'allowed' to park there? How very 'good' of the Supermarket Manager to 'allow' it - !!!!!! it's the law as MDBJ knows!!

All because MDBJ does not have a blue badge. Why should he/she have had to beg to be allowed to use a space they are legally entitled to? I am very much on the side of disabled people but that includes those without a Blue Badge - it's not some sort of mandatory tattoo that 'disabled people' have to have you know!

And going by the last page or two of posts, MDBJ is someone who you and webby would think was a selfish moron if you saw his/her car parked in that disabled bay with no Blue Badge on display. Webby would rush off and report the 'offending car' since webby doesn't have a life and doesn't understand the Equality Act...

I am always encouraging disabled people who post on here about being victimised by PPCs, to sue them under the Equality Act. MDBJ, for all the right reasons I hope YOU get a fake PCN soon so that you can sue the retailer and PPC and finally bring this huge breach into the public eye. And you would get a very nice 4-figure payout as well, I am sure.

Someone needs to sue a PPC soon for breaking this law. :mad: