Parking Eye v Somerfield Judgment

ManxRed

mo786uk wrote: »

I don't see why a landowner, such as Tesco cannot sue the driver themselves but use an agent to do it.

Because that would be illegal.

To sue as an agent you need to be licensed under the Courts and Legal Services Act - in other words you need to be a 'lawyer'.

mo786uk

I should clarify. It would be Tesco suing. But they would be farming it out to a third party. It would be in their name just that they would use the expertise of the PPC to handle it all for them.

As to whether supermarkets would actually sue customers.... I guess we will find ut if it is the only way they can protect their car parks.

I'll bow to your superior knowledge on the issue of who can sue though

AlexisV

Sainsbury's had zero to do with Euro Car Park's case last week.

There was no evidence that Sainsburys even held a contract with them.

Why?

taffy056

mo786uk wrote: »

I should clarify. It would be Tesco suing. But they would be farming it out to a third party. It would be in their name just that they would use the expertise of the PPC to handle it all for them.

As to whether supermarkets would actually sue customers.... I guess we will find ut if it is the only way they can protect their car parks.

I'll bow to your superior knowledge on the issue of who can sue though

That's of course assuming car parks need protecting, I travel a lot around the country and see very little evidence of that. The problem starts when a ppc turns up, as can be seen with Somerfield here, and with sainsbury with euro Alexi mentioned above, and with vcs and wickes previously.

mo786uk

taffy056 wrote: »

That's of course assuming car parks need protecting, I travel a lot around the country and see very little evidence of that. The problem starts when a ppc turns up, as can be seen with Somerfield here, and with sainsbury with euro Alexi mentioned above, and with vcs and wickes previously.

it seems clear from Somerfield they did have problems with their car parks - in one place the local residents were up in arms because they couldnt park there all day for free.

it seems somerfields problem was not being able to strike the right balance between what their customers needed and the !!!! takers.

i think it depends on how busy the area is, some supermarkets have car parks in prime locations where parking is difficult whe nwnating to visit other places.

the only things these court cases wil ldo i make companies find cleverer ways of acting within the law. i dont really see the alternative - free for all parking - happening.

taffy056

So you are saying then that somerfield had a separate problem at 17 locations and the only way was to get parking eye in, or do you think parking eye sold them on we will sort out your problem for you, as they do have one and we can do it for free and ensure you comply with the equalities act ? Parking companies offer a solution to a problem that very often does not exist, they in fact as I mentioned cause the problems.

mo786uk

Well lets not forget Somerfield are a big business with a lot of resources. They are not an old lady who had limited skill in entering into contracts.

Quite clearly Somerfield did have problems at their car parks - hence they already had enforcement by another company.

What appears to have happened is that they were caught out by how efficient the Parking Eye system is. As with the old system which was manned the PE system appears to have been brutally efficient and took no prisoners - hence why some people who Somerfield did not wnat to get tickets, did so.

What is also clear (and it may be the case that PE were partly to blame) is that Somerfield did not properly estimate how long genuine customers needed - which is why they kept asking for extensions.

There quite clearly is a problem, demostrated by the number of people who got tickets (approx 6000) - even if we say 50% were unwarranted that is still 3000 potentially vlaid tickets (as per Somerfields rules).

Bearing in mind this is 17 small somerfield shops over the period of around 3 months.

People overstaying parking quite clearly is a problem - hence why clamping and ppcs is such big business. Even if you take out all the dodgy tickets given I daresay you are still left with a significant number of people who knowingly overstayed in a car park.

surfboy1

mo786uk wrote: »

Well lets not forget Somerfield are a big business with a lot of resources. They are not an old lady who had limited skill in entering into contracts.

Quite clearly Somerfield did have problems at their car parks - hence they already had enforcement by another company.

What appears to have happened is that they were caught out by how efficient the Parking Eye system is. As with the old system which was manned the PE system appears to have been brutally efficient and took no prisoners - hence why some people who Somerfield did not wnat to get tickets, did so.

What is also clear (and it may be the case that PE were partly to blame) is that Somerfield did not properly estimate how long genuine customers needed - which is why they kept asking for extensions.

There quite clearly is a problem, demostrated by the number of people who got tickets (approx 6000) - even if we say 50% were unwarranted that is still 3000 potentially vlaid tickets (as per Somerfields rules).

Bearing in mind this is 17 small somerfield shops over the period of around 3 months.

People overstaying parking quite clearly is a problem - hence why clamping and ppcs is such big business. Even if you take out all the dodgy tickets given I daresay you are still left with a significant number of people who knowingly overstayed in a car park.

I can not see that overstaying in a supermarket car park is a problem for genuine supermarket customers. Some of the supermarkets i visit arer large multistores with resteraunts or cafes, and i often see that they put limits of 1 hour or 1 1/2 hours. To me that seems that the supermarkets want to rush their customers through, not eat in restraunts, not try on clothes, not take the time to chose which lcd telly or which laptop to buy!
I have also visited supermarkets with no PPCs at all, and ,might i add, no parking problems!
I know where i chose to spend my hard earned money!

trisontana

What about all the other "infractions" such as having your wheel just touching the line or parking in the "wrong" sort of bay? What if you do "overstay in a car park. You have probably spent quite a lot of money in that supermarket and your only thanks , because you have breached their silly rule, is to be presented with a ticket.

Most supermarkets don't need a PPC. Roll back the clock 10 years or so. Then you would have had a barrier with pay on exit or somebody checking your receipt to see that your had been a customer

mikey72

trisontana wrote: »

What about all the other "infractions" such as having your wheel just touching the line or parking in the "wrong" sort of bay? What if you do "overstay in a car park. You have probably spent quite a lot of money in that supermarket and your only thanks , because you have breached their silly rule, is to be presented with a ticket.

Most supermarkets don't need a PPC. Roll back the clock 10 years or so. Then you would have had a barrier with pay on exit or somebody checking your receipt to see that your had been a customer

Do you like the barrier enough to put a million pounds on your shopping bill though?

"Many of Somerfield stores had their own car parking facilities which were manned and serviced by Euro Car Parks Limited. The annual cost of these services to Somerfield was, it seems, in excess of £1m."