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

SodG24

webby23 wrote: »

If they are penalising selfish, arrogant morons who cant be bothered to park where they should?........TOTALLY !!!!!

You've clearly not read my posts ! My car has received two "invoices" from G24 despite the driver believing that they were sticking to the rules. You obviously do not understand that these are con artists out to make money out of innocent people.

vax2002

Obviously mr Angry not had one yet, dont worry you will get one, then when you come for advice, guess what we will tell you....

Coupon-mad

Flyboy152 wrote: »

And yet not one member of the parking m4fia have ever shown any disapproval for anyone parking where they shouldn't.

That is a lie, I am not the only one here who ALWAYS admonishes anyone admitting to using a disabled bay when they shouldn't. Here's just one example, in post #5 I think I made it clear:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/3278344

And you and Webby23 haven't a clue about who is entitled to use a disabled bay on private land have you? Webby23 didn't even understand the 'relevance' of someone being disabled but not having a Blue Badge!

A simple example of someone who HAS A LEGAL RIGHT to use any adjustments for disability that a retailer provides, would be someone who has just been diagnosed with a life-changing long-term condition. Let's say someone who has cancer, for example, could be any long-term condition really (not just obvious mobility issues or a wheelchair user).

Whether you and Webby like it or not, from the point of diagnosis that person is legally allowed to use a retailer's disabled bay even though they have no Blue Badge. And whether you like it or not, no you could not tell just by looking at them.

Just as you can't tell by looking at an Audi driver park then walk away with no car seat in the car, whether he is collecting a child. It's not rocket science to engage your brain and think:

- oh, he could be collecting a child over car seat height (only 135cm, could be an 8 year old).

- oh, there could be a car seat in the boot.

- oh, he could be collecting Mum with the baby in a buggy which IS the car seat.

- oh, it's none of my business anyway.

sarahg1969

webby23 wrote: »

Relevance.........??

The relevance is the statement that genuine disabled people have blue badges, the inference being that those who don't, arent. It was a reply (you'll see I quoted it).

Following on from that, Asda, the PPC and other drivers don't actually know whether the people allegedly abusing the bays are disabled or not.

sarahg1969

Flyboy152 wrote: »

So, because you can't answer the questions, accuse them of being a troll, not much of an advance on being an employee of a parking company, is it?

Again, where are all the posts telling people they shouldn't have parked in the disabled bays and parent and child parking?

Plenty of poster, including myself, have previously said that parking in disabled bays is not to be condoned unless you are disabled.

Flyboy152

Coupon-mad wrote: »

That is a lie, I am not the only one here who ALWAYS admonishes anyone admitting to using a disabled bay when they shouldn't. Here's just one example, in post #5 I think I made it clear:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/3278344

And you and Webby23 haven't a clue about who is entitled to use a disabled bay on private land have you? Webby23 didn't even understand the 'relevance' of someone being disabled but not having a Blue Badge!

A simple example of someone who HAS A LEGAL RIGHT to use any adjustments for disability that a retailer provides, would be someone who has just been diagnosed with a life-changing long-term condition. Let's say someone who has cancer, for example, could be any long-term condition really (not just obvious mobility issues or a wheelchair user).

Whether you and Webby like it or not, from the point of diagnosis that person is legally allowed to use a retailer's disabled bay even though they have no Blue Badge. And whether you like it or not, no you could not tell just by looking at them.

Just as you can't tell by looking at an Audi driver park then walk away with no car seat in the car, whether he is collecting a child. It's not rocket science to engage your brain and think:

- oh, he could be collecting a child over car seat height (only 135cm, could be an 8 year old).

- oh, there could be a car seat in the boot.

- oh, he could be collecting Mum with the baby in a buggy which IS the car seat.

- oh, it's none of my business anyway.

Wow, you really told him, didn't you. :wall:

And then you all advise him on how to get away with it. Were was the moral indignation, the admonishment and the, "serves him right?"

Who else ALWAYS admonishes anyone admitting to using a disabled bay when they shouldn't?

This particular post is very common and typical of the parking m4fia's attitude to disabled parking bays:

trisontana wrote: »

So what "rules" do you think have been broken? Parking in a disabled bay? 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. The money demanded is exorbitant becuase under civil law the land owner can only claim for actual material loss suffered. As this was a free car-park that loss is a big fat zero. Anything above that would be considered an unfair penalty in law.

Please stop taking these clowns seriously. They are not the police or the council. they are just a bunch of private citizens with no more power than you or I to demand money off another private citizen.

The reason they "get away with it" is that too many people fall for their official looking but meaningless letters and pay up without question. This is why this and other forums try and educate people into the true facts of the private parking "industry". We want these scam artists to go away and the only way that will happen is if enough people realise the truth and don't pay them.

Hardly telling him off, is it?

trisontana

Flyboy152 wrote: »

Wow, you really told him, didn't you. :wall:

And then you all advise him on how to get away with it. Were was the moral indignation, the admonishment and the, "serves him right?"

Who else ALWAYS admonishes anyone admitting to using a disabled bay when they shouldn't?

This particular post is very common and typical of the parking m4fia's attitude to disabled parking bays:



Hardly telling him off, is it?

But the person admitted he had made a genuine mistake. So a £70 payment for that? In your dreams.

Flyboy152

trisontana wrote: »

But the person admitted he had made a genuine mistake. So a £70 payment for that? In your dreams.

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.

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.

It doesn't matter anyway because that so-called charge is unenforceable. When will you realise that?

Flyboy152

trisontana wrote: »

It doesn't matter anyway because that so-called charge is unenforceable. When will you realise that?

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.