Do PE actually scam people?

RichardD1970

"Fining" people for leaving the site to visit other shops, even though the original planning permission allows for this as well as arbitrarily reducing the "allowed" time limit, again in contravention of planning permission.

Issuing "tickets" to those with blue badges despite the BPA code of conduct saying quite explicitly that they are exempt.

The list goes on.

Stonker

but do they say you've exceeded the time when you haven't? I can take 2 photos of a car and timestamp them what I like

peter_the_piper

Stonker wrote: »

So does the 'no return within x' apply to the vehicle or the driver? Could I reasonable be expected to say to my partner...'oh btw, don't go in Aldi for the next 2 hours because I went there'

Vehicle. Their ANPR cameras are not good enough to see drivers.

peter_the_piper

Stonker wrote: »

but do they say you've exceeded the time when you haven't? I can take 2 photos of a car and timestamp them what I like

We don't encourage fiddling in this way, we have the moral high ground and beat them often enough not to resort to this.

Stonker

peter_the_piper wrote: »

Vehicle. Their ANPR cameras are not good enough to see drivers.

OK, so would it be reasonable then to expect me to tell my parner which carparks I've been to while out in the car?

Stonker

peter_the_piper wrote: »

We don't encourage fiddling in this way, we have the moral high ground and beat them often enough not to resort to this.

I'm not talking about fiddling I'm just asking if they ever been seen to claim an overstay when the time wasn't actually exceeded

martmonk

peter_the_piper wrote: »

We don't encourage fiddling in this way, we have the moral high ground and beat them often enough not to resort to this.

I think the OP is asking whether PE effectively 'fiddle' by time stamping pics incorrectly.

I think the answer to that is no, although the cameras may not be calibrated properly so the times are not accurate.

Difference between not accurate and deliberately doctored though. And double dipping is a separate issue again.

Stonker

So I'm guessing if the camera's are not accurate then the evidence is not admissable unless any overstay is larger than any possible camera innacuracy?

martmonk

one appeal point is on the cameras yes.

hoohoo

Stonker wrote: »

OK, so would it be reasonable then to expect me to tell my parner which carparks I've been to while out in the car?

It is always sensible to take a photo of your car outside the car park if you are going to double dip.