Is there a place for private parking enforcement?

s555

ManxRed wrote: »

So, in relation to ANPR monitored sites, you're not familiar with the first in- last out scam? Or the tickets issued for overstaying by a matter of minutes when clearly those 'minutes' could be explained away easily by the amount of time looking for a space, parking, and then driving out again? Or where there are two entrances to a car park, one with ANPR and one without?

All frequently recounted on these and other fora. Still think there are no innocent motorists receiving tickets in ANPR sites? In that case our conversation is over because nothing I say will matter to your opinion.

As for the council enforcing things such as being parked 1mm over a white line, are you familiar with the term 'de minimis'? Frequently used to defeat council tickets of a similar nature, and doubtless perfectly applicable to any council-run scheme on private land. A PPC wouldn't factor this in however - they're just after your money.

I think you miss the point about the overhang. You have to set a limit somewhere is what I am saying, and anyone who is marginally over that limit and gets a ticket will feel aggrieved.

If the parking bosses and/or council decide they don't like people outside of the lines at all, but have instructed their wardens to give 5 cm grace, someone who is 5.1 cm over the line will get a ticket.

It may be that you think it is acceptable to park 3 foot over the line, but what do you do about people who park 3 foot 1 inch, or 4 foot? You have to issue the ticket at some point, surely, or you would have people parking in the middle of the road.

Your "de minimis" applies to people who are fractionally over the line, not fractionally over the tolerance provided exactly to avoid people claiming de minimis.

How far over the line would you say is fair before a ticket is issued? I am talking council here, to save the usual other arguments, not private.

I am not suggesting that someone who is 1mm over the painted line gets a ticket.

Coupon-mad

s555 wrote: »

How far over the line would you say is fair before a ticket is issued? I am talking council here, to save the usual other arguments, not private.

I am not suggesting that someone who is 1mm over the painted line gets a ticket.

It's quite a high tolerance for overhang, see below from the London-wide CEO's Handbook - issued by LondonCouncils who are the same people hearing the POPLA cases...so this is a very relevant link as regards the point you are trying to make.

Find the handbook to download here:

http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/pol...eohandbook.htm

go to near the end of the handbook (page 53 as I look at it):

'' a) Vehicle overhang
A CEO should only issue a PCN if the vehicle is parked
incorrectly to the extent that at least one wheel is wholly in
contravention, for example a wheel being wholly outside the
parking bay or wholly on a yellow line. If all of the wheels
are within the confines of the bay but the vehicle is large
and overhangs the bay to such an extent that it causes an
obstruction equal to a normally-sized vehicle with one wheel
wholly in contravention, then a PCN can also be issued. CEOs
must use their judgement on this, and record any evidence
(especially photographic) that proves the contravention.''


But!!!!!! that still doesn't mean that a private profit-making scumbag 'PCNs-R-Us' company can copy this, any more than I could copy it if a friend parked in my driveway a bit wonky! A friend visiting me is similar to a customer visiting a retail park = both are invited to park.



And I have to pick you up on this statement, in addition to the valid points already made about the 'two-visits/selective photos' scam which is so common:

s555 wrote: »

I'm not sure that many are truly innocent. Take the example of a car park with limited stay, policed by ANPR.

I don't think anyone that is ticketed in this scenario is "innocent". The computer is not lying (it may be made to do so, I admit). In these cases, it should really be a fair cop. The rules HAVE been broken.

Yep, plenty are innocent in law (Equality Act 2010):

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8488737.stm

And it's not just disabled people. So would elderly/infirm people be innocent, and mothers stopping to breastfeed a baby (which was an example on a thread on here only yesterday). All would be allowed more time by virtue of their 'protected characteristic' as the Act calls it.

Any harassment and failure to make reasonable adjustments for people with 'protected characteristics' as defined under the Act = unlawful on the part of the PPC and the retailer/landowner.