Brighton Marina

Coupon-mad

notanewuser wrote: »

I was there 3 weeks ago.

The casino has its own carpark.

We parked on the 7th floor in a normal space and transported 2 adults, 1 toddler, 1 pram loaded with stuff, suitcase, trunki and other bags to the 6th floor boardwalk using the built in ramps (plenty wide enough as they're designed for cars).

That's true, at Brighton Marina car park, the boardwalk and the car ramps are better than the [STRIKE]urinals[/STRIKE] stairs.

murrayfan_2

Coupon-mad wrote: »

IMHO not 'entirely acceptable' to adopt the BB scheme but in practice that is what most private car parks have done - in good faith, funnily enough. I expect most of them believe they have done so for the right reasons - the landowners I mean, not the monkeys (we know why they have adopted the scheme, to make scamming easy).

They can 'adopt' the BB scheme (no-one will stop them) but they are open to a legal challenge because clearly to then allow a third party scammer to harass disabled people who do not happen to have that badge, is unlawful. And it would be difficult, IMHO, for the landowner to prove that their actions have been 'reasonable' if they have not given due consideration to their duty to all disabled visitors and have then compounded this by not instructing their agents properly about cancelling fake PCNs issued to anyone who can show they had a legal right to park there.

The worst situations IMHO are where the scammers go for obviously disabled drivers, such as when they see the person get into a wheelchair and then issue a fake PCN because the BB is upside down or missing. Now that is a clear breach of the Act, disability discrimination without a doubt.

I think it is fairly 'acceptable' for a private landowner to 'adopt' the BB scheme if they do NOT have any PPC on site. E.g. if they put signs up in an attempt to ensure that disabled people can park there, and to dissuade lazy idiots, that's a good thing - and if challenged, could possibly be shown to be a reasonable attempt to comply with the Act. It's the addition of the PPC to the equation that then causes real harassment and upset.






Yes most definitely 'illegal' (unlawful may be a better word for such breaches). But again, the people to fight such things would not be the Police.

Could be Trading Standards, could be EHRC, or (dare I say it) DMUK - but from what we have seen, they only go after Councils because, despite being a self-styled 'disabled drivers' charity' they are known to be in the pockets of PPCs.

There is a tangled web here. And the PPCs have friends in high places too, there's a huge amount of money at stake here so the richest PPCs do pull certain strings.

:mad:

Thankyou for all this, it does seem quite complex to me to be honest. You mention above people proving they have a right to use the disabled bays, who would these people be and how would they prove it?. Thanks for your help with this, I actually intend to take it further re my local car park.

Coupon-mad

murrayfan wrote: »

Thankyou for all this, it does seem quite complex to me to be honest. You mention above people proving they have a right to use the disabled bays, who would these people be and how would they prove it?. Thanks for your help with this, I actually intend to take it further re my local car park.

No-one has to prove it, disabled bays are there for the disabled, no proof needed on private land despite what the signs say.

There is categorically no major problem on private land (such as Supermarket or cinema car parks) with people abusing disabled bays - it's a myth spread by uninformed people who judge it based on 'blue badge or not' and put 2 and 2 together and make 5.

The alarmist stories in the press about it were based purely on something called the 'Baywatch scheme' by DMUK. Guess what they asked their readers (of Disability Now' magazine) to report to them on, for their flawed survey?! :rotfl:

If a PPC issues a fake PCN, then as soon as they 'knew or should have known' about a relevant disability, from that moment, any harassment is a breach of the Equality Act. That's what I meant about proving you had a right to park there - only needed if someone gets a fake PCN. It's important to tell the retailer and the PPC straight away to give them the chance to put the discrimination right and withdraw the charge...but they never do. That's when people are then empowered to sue for damages.

If I was parking in a disabled bay to pick up a disabled person I would probably put a note on the dashboard like trubster did on pepipoo. He did everything right and still got that fake PCN and harassment.

murrayfan_2

Coupon-mad wrote: »

No-one has to prove it, disabled bays are there for the disabled, no proof needed on private land despite what the signs say.

...........................

If a PPC issues a fake PCN, then as soon as they 'knew or should have known' about a relevant disability, from that moment, any harassment is a breach of the Equality Act. That's what I meant about proving you had a right to park there - only needed if someone gets a fake PCN. It's important to tell the retailer and the PPC straight away to give them the chance to put the discrimination right and withdraw the charge...but they never do. That's when people are then empowered to sue for damages.

/QUOTE]


^ quote from coupon-mad

****************

This from me (sorry I've messed this post up a bit) -
...............but this is my point, you say no-one needs to 'prove' it, but then you go on to say that they (the PPC) 'should have known' about the disability. So how are they supposed to know unless a person proves it in some way (unless obviously they see the person at the time)?.

Stroma

How they supposed to know ? Well ticketing someone being in a wheelchair would be an indicator I think, also it being a mobility vehicle it would have on the tax disc about that, and I do believe a disabled tax disc could be on a standard vehicle. Appeals saying I'm disabled would also be something.

The point and we are going in circles is that it's up to the motorist to decide if they need a disabled parking on private land, as its unregulated and the blue badge scheme does not apply there. The parking companies use disabled people as a cash cow, we know as plenty of them post here because of it. I would say more disabled people post here than anyone else.

atilla

murrayfan wrote: »

This from me (sorry I've messed this post up a bit) -
...............but this is my point, you say no-one needs to 'prove' it, but then you go on to say that they (the PPC) 'should have known' about the disability. So how are they supposed to know unless a person proves it in some way (unless obviously they see the person at the time)?.

Because to be made to highlight a disability is discrimination.

Get over this disability thing. not your problem, it's the PPCs, especially has in nearly all circumstances, they have no right to any money anyway.

Coupon-mad

murrayfan wrote: »

This from me (sorry I've messed this post up a bit) -
...............but this is my point, you say no-one needs to 'prove' it, but then you go on to say that they (the PPC) 'should have known' about the disability.
So how are they supposed to know unless a person proves it in some way (unless obviously they see the person at the time)?.

Why should they know? What business is it of a third party scammer?

I did suggest at the bottom of my post that people are well advised to put a note on the car if collecting a disabled person. But there's no lawful reason to have to ID yourself/your passenger as 'disabled' like that, why should they? I only suggest it because it can avoid a fake PCN and can also lay the groundwork to cheerfully sue the PPC if they ignore the indicator there on the dashboard.

I was saying you can only say there has been disability discrimination if the perpetrators 'knew or should have known' about the the disability. So that's the only reason why I would make sure the car had some sort of indicator of disability, in order to sue later if they dare discriminate. People with a motability car with a disabled tax disc need to do nothing at all as the car already indicates the disability - if the PPC monkey bothers to look.

You are still viewing this from the 'how can a PPC police the car park then?' angle.

Our angle is that they should get stuffed because it's not their business unless they do it properly and thoughtfully with full knowledge of invisible disability and the overriding simple legal issue of need, not badge. A retailer needs NO-ONE to 'police' disabled bays except perhaps a member of their own staff HELPING disabled people to find a suitable bay nearby - even using P&C bays (gimmick anyway) and loading areas at busy times of course - and being a visible presence to dissuade the odd lazy idiot.

murrayfan_2

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Why should they know? What business is it of a third party scammer?

I did suggest at the bottom of my post that people are well advised to put a note on the car if collecting a disabled person. But there's no lawful reason to have to ID yourself/your passenger as 'disabled' like that, why should they? I only suggest it because it can avoid a fake PCN and can also lay the groundwork to cheerfully sue the PPC if they ignore the indicator there on the dashboard.

I was saying you can only say there has been disability discrimination if the perpetrators 'knew or should have known' about the the disability. So that's the only reason why I would make sure the car had some sort of indicator of disability, in order to sue later if they dare discriminate. People with a motability car with a disabled tax disc need to do nothing at all as the car already indicates the disability - if the PPC monkey bothers to look.

You are still viewing this from the 'how can a PPC police the car park then?' angle.

Our angle is that they should get stuffed because it's not their business unless they do it properly and thoughtfully with full knowledge of invisible disability and the overriding simple legal issue of need, not badge. A retailer needs NO-ONE to 'police' disabled bays except perhaps a member of their own staff HELPING disabled people to find a suitable bay nearby - even using P&C bays (gimmick anyway) and loading areas at busy times of course - and being a visible presence to dissuade the odd lazy idiot.

You actually said that if someone appealed they would need to show they had a right to use those bays.

murrayfan_2

atilla wrote: »

Because to be made to highlight a disability is discrimination.

Get over this disability thing. not your problem, it's the PPCs, especially has in nearly all circumstances, they have no right to any money anyway.

But making a disabled bay highly visible, with a picture of a wheelchair painted in it and bit yellow marks painted round it, is highlighting a disability too.

and my 'problem' is that when I go out with my disabled husband we have a lot of trouble finding a disabled bay to park in, because they seem to be used (in some instances) by people who aren't disabled.

murrayfan_2

Stroma wrote: »

How they supposed to know ? Well ticketing someone being in a wheelchair would be an indicator I think, also it being a mobility vehicle it would have on the tax disc about that, and I do believe a disabled tax disc could be on a standard vehicle. Appeals saying I'm disabled would also be something.

Obviously. But I take it that not every instance of ticketing was done when 'someone in a wheelchair' was using the space, or was seen using the space?. And judging from what you yourself have said, the nil tax disc wouldn't be necessary in these cases - it might not be the disabled person's car for example. Again, appeals saying 'I'm disabled' would appear relevant, but you've all been telling me that this isn't relevant, because the penalties aren't legal in the first place. This is exactly why I'm confused.