We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Yay! Smart Parking - Equalities Act? - CANCELLED
Options
Comments
-
Not sure what your point is. Should I have sent my 5 year old to get his medicine?One important thing to remember is that when you get to the end of this sentence, you'll realise it's just my sig.0
-
I'm not being pedantic I am stating that the OP has not said anything about who was in the vehicle. That being so its a fair observation as you said unequivocally that the disabled person was not with him. And it's still not clear nowWhen posting a parking issue on MSE do not reveal any information that may enable PPCs to identify you. They DO monitor the forum.
We don't need the following to help you.
Name, Address, PCN Number, Exact Date Of Incident, Date On Invoice, Reg Number, Vehicle Picture, The Time You Entered & Left Car Park, Or The Amount of Time You Overstayed.
:beer: Anti Enforcement Hobbyist Member :beer:0 -
What would the difference be? He's a child. His parents have to get his prescriptions
EDIT: I'm not meaning to be deliberately evasive. I'm genuinely interested in the law in general.One important thing to remember is that when you get to the end of this sentence, you'll realise it's just my sig.0 -
Don't forget it's the bpa with the google alerts and not necessarily the parking companies, and I can't see the bpa going out to help companies like smart parking. Though I wouldn't be surprised if parking eye passes things on for a few quid
The BPA Ltd did everything they could to defend not so smart earlier this year with the renaming scam.0 -
halibut2209 wrote: »Not sure what your point is. Should I have sent my 5 year old to get his medicine?
Unless I have completely misread the thread, you went to get a prescription for your disabled child, and as you didn't say he was in the car, I took it that he wasn't. If he was with you, then that changes everything and my comments didn't apply.
What I was saying is that if you were simply picking up your son's prescription when he wasn't in the car and no disabled person was present either, then quoting the Equality Act would be a misuse of that act. Furthermore, it is my belief that it would totally fail at POPLA.
You have a perfectly valid case for an appeal based on the fact that they have used a first in - last out basis for charging you and that would be my appeal point but given that the Parking Prankster was unable to convince a POPLA adjudicator that his 2 visits were just that, then any proof that you could supply may be necessary as the PPCs have the upper hand by denying the first out last in photos.0 -
So again I ask what the difference is. He has a disability which requires medication. We have to get that for him as he is 5 and clearly cannot get it himself.One important thing to remember is that when you get to the end of this sentence, you'll realise it's just my sig.0
-
Forget the double-dipping. What I'm asking about is the Equalities Act. As far as I'm aware this means that shops etc must make allowances for disability-related events. Is handing in and collecting a prescription for a disabled person covered under that act?One important thing to remember is that when you get to the end of this sentence, you'll realise it's just my sig.0
-
I do believe someone is taking the p*ss here.0
-
Going for a prescription for a disabled son without a disabled person in the car is stretching things to a point where it falls beneath any reasonable adjustments being made for those who do visit the car park and need adjustments themselves for their disabilities.
I generally agree with everything you post but in this case I must object.
As a perfectly able person I would never object to someone using a disabled space and a blue badge to collect medicine for a disabled person - regardless of if the disabled person was present or not.
Regardless, as "blue badge" requirements are not applicable on private land the argument is theoretical anyway.0 -
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 351.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.7K Spending & Discounts
- 244.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177K Life & Family
- 257.6K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards