Which, what a dissapointment!

fisherjim

Just received my latest copy of Which, and I am amazed at their reply to a member requesting help over a parking charge issued in the Lake District.
The lady entered a wrong digit on a pay and display machine in a private car park, and received a £100 charge.
Her appeal to POPLA was obviously rejected and she asked Which for help.

Their reply:

If you enter a private car park with clear parking restrictions, you're deemed to have accepted them. If it's clear on signs that you must input your car registration number and fail to, a breach of contract may have occurred.
But the car park operator must show you didn't buy a ticket, or that it wasn't valid due to the number plate. You can resist a fine if that proof isn't provided.
If a firm threatens fines without proof, refer to trading standards before seeking legal advice.

Really reassuring from an organisation that you would expect to know better!

Stroma

They're as bad as CAB with their advice, this probably comes direct from BPA independent advice as obviously they are the regulator (NOT!)

fisherjim

I have just sent Which the following (not that it will make much difference):
I always considered Which to give good impartial advice to consumers, but reading the above reply to a member asking for help with a Parking Charge Notice from a private parking company, I have revised my opinion of you!

Your advice to the lady was a best misguided, but the inclusion of the word FINE twice was totally wrong (surely you MUST know this), and in support of the scam tactics used by these moneymaking companies.
Where do you get your advice from, the old boys club for private parking companies known as the BPA?
I feel inclined to cancel my subscription in protest, how many more of your "helpful" articles are so ill informed and misleading?

john1

fisherjim

I entirely concur with you sentiments :T and will also be contacting Which to voice my disapproval of their article

BASFORDLAD

ive just had a reply

Dear Basfordlad

Thanks for your email regarding our article in the March edition of Which? page 75 "Pay and Dismay".

While we accept and agree with your comments that private companies cannot fine anyone however, we have used the word "fine" within our advice section as this is the term we find our members who use our legal service are familiar with in this type of situation.

We appreciate your feedback and have no desire to mislead our readers so thank you for drawing this to our attention.

Thank you for your interest in our Ask Which? article and if I can be of further assistance please do not hesitate to contact me.

Regards

Stroma

What a lousy excuse for misleading people! This is not a bloody fine, perpetuating the myth will only confuse people into thinking that these companies have some legitimacy ! It's a shocking reply and they should be ashamed of themselves!

fisherjim

BASFORDLAD wrote: »

ive just had a reply

Dear Basfordlad

Thanks for your email regarding our article in the March edition of Which? page 75 "Pay and Dismay".

While we accept and agree with your comments that private companies cannot fine anyone however, we have used the word "fine" within our advice section as this is the term we find our members who use our legal service are familiar with in this type of situation.

We appreciate your feedback and have no desire to mislead our readers so thank you for drawing this to our attention.

Thank you for your interest in our Ask Which? article and if I can be of further assistance please do not hesitate to contact me.

Regards

Yes you can be of assistance, you can run an article exposing the scamming tactics of PPC's.

They haven't even replied to my email:mad:

Coupon-mad

MonkeySavingExpart wrote: »

Yes, very annnnnnoying.

You trying to build up a post count or summat? I just looked at your other post.