"Times" Newspaper Carries Leader on PPC's

Goldhanger

The "Times" to-day, Monday 10 October, is carrying a leader (page 2) on the proposed legislation regarding clamping and parking on private land. Page 5 has a half page article expanding on the leader. The "Times" appears to be set against the new legislation embedded in the Protection of Freedom Bill which will provide loopholes for the "cowboys".
The BPA put their side of the story.
The article goes on to highlight the fact that the legislation would transfer liabilty from driver to keeper.
Edmund King (president of the AA) has (the "Times" writes) approached 36 MP's at the weekend urging them to support an amendement.
The article is worth reading.

peter_the_piper

If anyone has a link to the text of the page it would be interesting. Not everyone buys the times and we can't now link to the site since we have to pay.
ps. Post this on the news articles section on pepipoo they will find it most interesting.

vax2002

Think it is covered by copyright.

robredz

vax2002 wrote: »

Think it is covered by copyright.

The Times did itself no favours when it put up the paywall....

robredz

peter_the_piper wrote: »

If anyone has a link to the text of the page it would be interesting. Not everyone buys the times and we can't now link to the site since we have to pay.
ps. Post this on the news articles section on pepipoo they will find it most interesting.

If a link was posted unfortunately the paywall would stop you viewing it

vax2002

Perhaps that why they can charge for it, because it contains something that people actually might want to read other than, katie price, x factor tv soaps.
Something's are worth paying for.

trisontana

More sloppy journalism, with the liberal use of the "f" word throughout the article.

Goldhanger

Yep, in the leader/article the "Times" unfortunately use the word "fine" a few times - pity.

Couple of choice extracts:-

The article does say "....The BPA says that it has offered to set up an appeals system for private parking but in return is demanding "keeper liablity", whereby the owner is liable for penalties (!) rather than the driver..." The best bit though is "....The British Parking Association (BPA), which represents 150 private car park operators, concedes that the Bill as it stands risks turning cowboy clampers into rogue ticketers. "There is a real danger that it will happen" a spokesman said...."

Blimey, now that might be a bit of a problem........

The article also highlights the fact that of access to the DVLA database.

Hadeon

Goldhanger wrote: »

Yep, in the leader/article the "Times" unfortunately use the word "fine" a few times - pity.

Couple of choice extracts:-

The article does say "....The BPA says that it has offered to set up an appeals system for private parking but in return is demanding "keeper liablity", whereby the owner is liable for penalties (!) rather than the driver..." The best bit though is "....The British Parking Association (BPA), which represents 150 private car park operators, concedes that the Bill as it stands risks turning cowboy clampers into rogue ticketers. "There is a real danger that it will happen" a spokesman said...."

Blimey, now that might be a bit of a problem........

The article also highlights the fact that of access to the DVLA database.

No problems with 'rogue ticketers' as things stand at the moment then? :mad:

HO87

And Edmund King has only just caught on?

If I paid the membership myself (paid by the company) I'd be inviting him to try a course of Phyllosan ("fortifies the over forties" was once its tagline) or better still get his rear end down out of that tower in Blasingsmoke and join the real world. He wouldn't have to travel that far. Asda's in Brighton Hill would do. See if he could tempt TCP into issuing one of their specials. Whilst he was sitting there in his limo he could also take a look at this page from Asda's website and then ask himself whether its true that anyone can fine anyone they please? If he was still to suggest that asserting legal rights that don't exist in the form portrayed and kidding people into believing that they do and getting them to pay you as a result is anything other than "rogue" I'd be interested in hearing from him.

That being said if 36 MP's are being fired up then we need to know who they are and get at them quickly. These are the people who need to be educated fully about private parking companies beyond the self-interested spin they've been fed by the BPA.

AlexisV

It seems that the lawmakers do not grasp the simple fact that the whole operation is a sc**.

So it is impossible to put it into legislation.