Help I've got a PCN for pulling into an access road

AdrianC

trisontana wrote: »

So is sending out a bit of paper a couple of weeks after the event going to stop terrorist activity? I don't think so.

The same argument could, of course, be similarly easily levelled at any and every other photographic traffic enforcement.

bod1467

Which completely misses the point. That is traffic enforcement ... VCS specifically say about it being a "high security zone". How is a camera recording a "parking" event and sending out some paperwork 2 weeks later improving and enforcing security?

Answer - it isn't; it is ALL about making money from made-up rules.

Custard_Pie

bod1467 wrote: »

Which completely misses the point. That is traffic enforcement ... VCS specifically say about it being a "high security zone". How is a camera recording a "parking" event and sending out some paperwork 2 weeks later improving and enforcing security?

Answer - it isn't; it is ALL about making money from made-up rules.

So, it can't be trespass or contract breach then, so must be a penalty, which PPC's claim their invoices are not.

bod1467

Custard_Pie wrote: »

so must be a penalty, which PPC's claim their invoices are not.

If a PPC claimed it was a penalty they'd be breaking the law.

fisherjim

AdrianC wrote: »

Sounds like a fair cop, tbh. You stopped where stopping was not permitted, for a trivial reason - certainly no emergency. "I didn't see the signs" is not a defence.

So if you stalled your car in the same locality for 10 seconds you would quite happily pay their trumped up fake charge would you?

Jim_AFCB

What is the betting that AdrianC owns or works for a PPC?

AdrianC

bod1467 wrote: »

Which completely misses the point.

One of us is, but I suspect it's crusading zeal which is leading to it. (Oh, and going back a few replies, I meant that a normal public-sector PCN was easier to enforce in court.)

fisherjim wrote: »

So if you stalled your car in the same locality for 10 seconds you would quite happily pay their trumped up fake charge would you?

The OP, just in case you'd forgotten, deliberately chose to drive into an access road and stop for a couple of minutes. He didn't "stall for 10 seconds", and he wasn't in a location where stalling would have rendered him stationary even briefly.

trisontana

But there have been documented instances on here and on other forums where a motorist has had to stop because they had no choice. One where a drivers floor-mat had moved and was getting in the way of the pedals and another where their seat had moved and had to be adjusted. There was an instance where somebody had stopped at a post-box to post a letter.

bazster

The parking forum knows the facts of the case perfectly well, VCS and Robbing Hood Airport are very well known to us and and a frequent subject.

It may help to put the purpose and legitimacy of their unenforceable charges into context if you knew that Liverpool Airport gets a £30 kickback from VCS for every fake fine that someone is stupid or intimidated enough to pay, and given that Robbing Hood Airport is under the same ownership as Liverpool Airport and uses the same parking parasites there is every reason to believe that the same cosy baksheesh arrangement is in place.

bazster

AdrianC wrote: »

The same argument could, of course, be similarly easily levelled at any and every other photographic traffic enforcement.

Do cameras deter me from speeding and jumping red lights? Yes. If I were planning a suicide attack on an airport would I be deterred by the prospect of getting an invoice in the post a couple of weeks later? You figure it out...