Parking meeting

Hot_Bring

I-LOV-MONEY wrote: »

It was at the end of December.

I shall continue to monitor it.

Now to look up details of Trading Standards, but I suppose they will get a similar response from BPA that I got.

In which case both C2C and the BPA are being purposely deceitful.

I know both monitor this forum so they can PM me if they think I've misrepresented them. Liars and conmen both.

I-LOV-MONEY

I have now e-mailed both the local Trading Standards Office, and also C2C directly.

Hot_Bring

I-LOV-MONEY wrote: »

I have now e-mailed both the local Trading Standards Office, and also C2C directly.

Ha ha - good luck with that ! Over the last couple of months I've sent C2C teasing emails because they were too cowardly to even put up a defence at POPLA. Took them an age to respond and the paraphrased version of their email was "Happy New Year and hope you have a less stressful 2014. Good luck with your campaign"

I-LOV-MONEY

Hot_Bring wrote: »

the paraphrased version of their email was "Happy New Year and hope you have a less stressful 2014. Good luck with your campaign"

:rotfl:

Well as I have asked them about particular signs erected after they had left the BPA, and that I have queried it with the BPA and Trading Standards may prompt a quicker response!

I-LOV-MONEY

Just had a reply from C2C

The team are currently changing the signs as we speak and have been over the last week or so and aim to finish all of our 1400 sites by the end of the month, thank you for your diligence but this is all in hand the signs were printed with the BPA logo's and we currently are using the IPC overlays to keep it green and the costs down to keep our free of charge service going.


An executive decision was made to voluntary change from the BPA to the IPC.


Wow - an "executive decision", as opposed to the attendants just deciding for themselves!!!

Would someone please tell me the implications of them joining IPC?

Presumably their "free of charge service" is because they collect in the charges from motorists who are wrongly parked.

Bantex_2

What difference does it make what logo is on their signs?

Hot_Bring

Bantex wrote: »

What difference does it make what logo is on their signs?

It tells you which ATA's rules they have to work by.

Redx

I-LOV-MONEY wrote: »

Just had a reply from C2C

The team are currently changing the signs as we speak and have been over the last week or so and aim to finish all of our 1400 sites by the end of the month, thank you for your diligence but this is all in hand the signs were printed with the BPA logo's and we currently are using the IPC overlays to keep it green and the costs down to keep our free of charge service going.


An executive decision was made to voluntary change from the BPA to the IPC.


Wow - an "executive decision", as opposed to the attendants just deciding for themselves!!!

Would someone please tell me the implications of them joining IPC?

Presumably their "free of charge service" is because they collect in the charges from motorists who are wrongly parked.

check here https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4835260

and here https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4852695

The_Deep

I attended a similar meeting with the Management Company of a complex in which I own an investment property. At present there is no parking control except a code controlled barrier.

The problem which we have tenants with two or more cars parking in other peoples' spaces, on access roads, and in visitors' and disabled places. Most of their landlords are large corporations or absentee landlords and take little interest. The president of the management company has seven votes and is strongly in favour of calling in a PPC. Others who attended, (only five or six), were in two minds.

I spoke out strongly, warning them of the box of serpents they would be opening and threatened that, should they appoint a rogue PPC, I would issue a cease and desist order against both themselves and the PPCI. I also brought to their attention Roger Davis v UKPC told them that, should a PPC disrupt the quiet enjoyment of one of my tenants, I would consider taking action against the company.

In the end it was agreed that the Directors would look into the matter and report back.

Might I suggest to OP that he investigates opting out of the permit scheme and puts the PPC on notice that any interference with his vehicle may result in a court claim for trespass.

I-LOV-MONEY

I have just heard back from the Property Manager of the estate.

Thank you for the email, the patrols did start slowly but I do believe they have increased now, unfortunately the first parking ticket which I was told about was one from an authorised resident parking in their own personal space. Naturally this was reversed once I contacted the company in this regard but not all tickets when issued are reported to me directly. I will be receiving reporting from the company and believe they will shortly be using an online based system where I will be able to view all tickets issued, this should help with monitoring the parking.

Sadly I did not receive any comments regarding the forum, although I know that the directors are currently considering suspending the parking contract whilst certain elements are ironed out. Perhaps this information has contributed to this along with incorrect tickets being issued.

LOL about the first resident ticketed!

I subsequently asked what elements needing ironing out.

Unfortunately there has been some miscommunication of information from some residents to the patrollers regarding the areas they are permitted to patrol. To remedy this I will be meeting a representative and showing them exactly where they are and aren’t allowed to ticket. Needless to say I did already do this before the contract was put in place.

It is something to do with the covenants regarding the estate, and some places cannot be touched (no I don't understand why, but herein is probably a legal minefield).