Is there a place for private parking enforcement?

ManxRed

s555 wrote: »

I have already explained that I was not asked to find an example of fines, Jane.
And, I am assuming, but correct me if I am wrong, if you do not pay said penalty, it can become a fine at court. And, to be pedantic, I believe it would be correct to put an apostrophe at the end of magistrates, as it is the court of / belonging to the magistrates. But who needs to be pedantic about spelling on a money saving forum?

I didn't ask you to find anything. I've asked you a whole bunch of questions which you've conveniently glossed over. Let's try another one, where would the money from these penalties go?

The railways are providing a public service, as is the local council. They have, in the case of fare dodging, suffered a financial loss as a result, which any reasonable thinking person might consider that they are entitled to recoup. They reinvest monies obtained back into public services. What do PPC's do with regards to investment in public services? How does the analogy of a train penalty fare even begin to compare with a punitive charge relating to (for example) parking slightly outside a bay in a free car park?

You dismissed my earlier point about Simon Renshaw Smith's yacht furniture, missing the point spectacularly. PPCs exist purely as a private profit-making enterprise. They should NEVER be given powers to fine or issue penalties, the incentive is based purely on profit, and nothing else.

Of course, that means that in any legislation-backed model, it should fall upon the council to administer such penalties, not a private profit making company.

This would achieve your goal of having legitimate penalties for private parking, but would by necessity cut PPCs out of the loop, and correctly so.

The only reason you would continue to dismiss this model is if you yourself had some kind of vested interest in PPCs. Is that the case here?

ManxRed

s555 wrote: »

I think he's gone to sleep, or asking his mum to check his next post before he submits.

One-nil on the penalty challenge.

So, what was the next objection?

Do you want a serious discussion on this, or are you going to continue acting the pr*ck?

TrickyWicky

s555 wrote: »

It was driver8. Stop skip reading the thread

I haven't. Just like today MSE listed Page 8 but not page 7 so I clicked on 8 and then once in the topic clicked page 7 to go back and catch up.

I don't recall seeing you mention d!ckt8 anywhere regarding my point. You did mention him setting 'this challenge' however you didn't make it clear that it related to what you had accused me of asking you about.

Right, now yours is the last post on page 7 I'm off to read page 8.

s555

ManxRed wrote: »

Do you want a serious discussion on this, or are you going to continue acting the pr*ck?

Sorry, but you were the one that brought my spelling in to the argument. Just lowering myself to that level. I'll be a bit more intellectual from this point. But seeing as we are now using personal insults as well, I won't raise the bar too much.

s555

TrickyWicky wrote: »

I haven't. Just like today MSE listed Page 8 but not page 7 so I clicked on 8 and then once in the topic clicked page 7 to go back and catch up.

I don't recall seeing you mention d!ckt8 anywhere regarding my point. You did mention him setting 'this challenge' however you didn't make it clear that it related to what you had accused me of asking you about.

Right, now yours is the last post on page 7 I'm off to read page 8.

Keep up

s555

ManxRed wrote: »

I didn't ask you to find anything. I've asked you a whole bunch of questions which you've conveniently glossed over. Let's try another one, where would the money from these penalties go?

The railways are providing a public service, as is the local council. They have, in the case of fare dodging, suffered a financial loss as a result, which any reasonable thinking person might consider that they are entitled to recoup. They reinvest monies obtained back into public services. What do PPC's do with regards to investment in public services? How does the analogy of a train penalty fare even begin to compare with a punitive charge relating to (for example) parking slightly outside a bay in a free car park?

You dismissed my earlier point about Simon Renshaw Smith's yacht furniture, missing the point spectacularly. PPCs exist purely as a private profit-making enterprise. They should NEVER be given powers to fine or issue penalties, the incentive is based purely on profit, and nothing else.

Of course, that means that in any legislation-backed model, it should fall upon the council to administer such penalties, not a private profit making company.

This would achieve your goal of having legitimate penalties for private parking, but would by necessity cut PPCs out of the loop, and correctly so.

The only reason you would continue to dismiss this model is if you yourself had some kind of vested interest in PPCs. Is that the case here?

I have already answered the money one. I don't care. Much like I don't care what speeding fines are spent on. Or are they speeding penalties?

In the grand scheme, revenue from speeding is so insignificant it can genuinely be claimed that it is not about the revenue, but the deterrent.

My ideal is not about raising money, it is about stopping people from parking where they shouldn't, or for longer than they should. Look a few pages back, I said this already.

I've never asked for PPCs in their current guise, or any guise for that matter, to be running this show. Nor have I suggested they keep the money for themselves.

However, lets be realistic. If it costs you 500 quid a month to "police" a car park, and you issue 50 tickets, you need them to be a tenner each or you might as well not bother. And if the private sector isn't interested, who will do it? Back to my vision of anarchy in some car parks ( yes, but not all)

I do not, and have never, worked in the parking or retail industries.

Half_way

Once upon a time there were no PPCs infesting car parks, and these car parks were free from threats, free from ANPR cameras and free from grumpy blokes in high vis jackets armed with yellow envelopes, back then the car parks seemed to be OK, without anarchy breaking out.

Coupon-mad

Your 'vision of anarchy' in some car parks, LOL!

Jeez, all they need are some polite signs near the disabled bays and maybe a staff member popping up there next to those important bays every so often as a visible presence (could be an employee's job to just stand there sometimes, in between trolley collecting). That would be all it would need since there really isn't a rife problem with 'disabled bay abuse' - it's a myth spread by PPCs and their 'in the pocket' charity friends at Disabled Motoring UK.

Apart from that, in Supermarket or retail car parks, a simple system of spending a tenner and showing your receipt to an employee as you leave past a pole barrier (they are not that expensive). That way then even the speculative parkers become customers.

But wait...your vision of anarchy included people smashing through barriers didn't it? Happens every day of course!

:rotfl:

Fergie76

I have very rarely seen a PPC parking attendant in any car park in the town where I live, so it's definitely not about parking management.

And if it is about parking management, why don't the attendants (when present) go and explain to the person when parking that the can't park there or they are a 1mm over the white line, straighten up; instead of waiting until the person is out of sight and then slapping an invoice on their car?

How can camera's at the entrance / exit to car parks police car park? And why have time limits at the big shopping malls, when it can take all day to do your shopping, lunch and movie etc?

Also, 'policing' car parks, is a business cost and not recoverable by these invoices, as a court has already ruled.

taffy056

Half_way wrote: »

Once upon a time there were no PPCs infesting car parks, and these car parks were free from threats, free from ANPR cameras and free from grumpy blokes in high vis jackets armed with yellow envelopes, back then the car parks seemed to be OK, without anarchy breaking out.

The problems started when ppcs turned up, going back some years ago there was barriers and a person checking receipts on the way out, you pay a quid without a receipt, technology has moved on you could a token or voucher etc to put into the barrier for exit. Yes it costs money but it will stop most people who abuse car parks. Also if shops were that concerned about people over staying, why not have signs in the shop themselves ? The answer is of course they don't people to run out of time shopping so don't want to rush them, which goes counter what the scammers do in their name out in the car park.

I would suggest people write to shops to complain about these fake tickets with words like. Tesco Parking Charge Notice etc, make sure you consider that they issued this ticket, always refer to it as that despite what they say, refuse point blank to deal with parking companies directly