Just need to check ....

I-LOV-MONEY

ampersand wrote: »

ILM-have had putah probs, still not sorted but laterally online, sortakinda.
Can't see ems.
Did you try to send a new pm today?
#
Nothing proposed allows for surprise visitors, surprise visitors who stay longer than a week, or who return within 7 days.
If MA are serious about this, they are retrospectively altering terms of Lease, esp. with the dear old inalienable 'right to quiet enjoyment'.

Sent PM last night. Did you receive?

ampersand

No, still no access to ems and pm box was full. A bit of space now.

Redx

I-LOV-MONEY wrote: »

In the store by the Customer Service desk they have a little terminal and you put in your registration number and up pops a photo of your car, and it means you are permitted to stay beyond the normal 3 hours. (How can anybody be shopping for more than 3 hours I don't know !)

happens quite a lot actually

my missus will go to Morrissons and have lunch with her friends, then do the shopping and come home , the car is there 3 to 4 hours whilst all this is happening

she also went out with her sister a year ago and shopped on our local retail park and had lunch too, almost 5 hours in total after visiting about 10 shops, some like BHS more than once as they shopped there first and had lunch there later

PE sent a PCN in the post due to it being over 4 hours on a free car park

the receipts for the shops were found and totalled some £80 so PE dropped the pcn when challenged with the CM template from 12 months ago with an extra point about patronage of the shops on site backed up by scans of all the receipts

I did post this success back then as it never even went to popla

so people tend to combine a lot of shopping or visits or tasks into one round trip, sometimes on the one car park for all of it, plus the shops now have more options than just food , like vision checking and spectacles (opticians) , cafes , photo booths , mobile phone topups , clothes , shoes , slippers , cashpoints , all sorts

---

also - my elderly mum went to hospital for an appointment about 3 years ago, I took her as she didnt drive and the appointment was to last some 15 minutes as she had been before and it was a follow up checkup

they made us wait 2.5 hours before being seen , so it was over 3 hours by the time we got back to the car , and that was for just one hospital appointment, no shopping and no leaving the site either

my point is, dont ask how or why it takes time to do something, it takes as long as it takes , whatever the circumstances

I-LOV-MONEY

Redx wrote: »

my point is, dont ask how or why it takes time to do something, it takes as long as it takes , whatever the circumstances

Thanks. I had never considered that. I just presumed people go into a shop, buy their groceries etc and leave!

ampersand

Extending poss. circs - long ranging, rpt visit repairs?

Then, what about works undertaken by MA, rather than individual householders? Space and time limit pressures then, surely?

Coupon-mad

I-LOV-MONEY wrote: »

Thanks. I had never considered that. I just presumed people go into a shop, buy their groceries etc and leave!

That's what a bloke does, not what us women do!

I-LOV-MONEY

A further update. A reply from the Management company, in response to my e-mail from last night, received this morning (obviously not a lot of work to do!!)

[FONT=&quot]Thank you for your email[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]I have responded to the points that you have raised below[/FONT]


I am not going to respond to your recent e-mail in detail as it seems you are determined to push this through even though only 30 people from 107 properties have responded requiring permits, hardly the "overwhelming response" you stated in your letter.

There were a couple of points though I do wish to mention Firstly in the correspondence between your former colleague and the Police Officer, a property and someone was identified. Can the Police not take any action if there is evidence of the person engaging in commercial activity from a residential property? (I believe the property is (another property management company) responsibility).


[FONT=&quot]Ideally one would expect some form of penal action from the police but as we all know they will rely on the CPS to confirm if it is viable to pursue it further , it is also likely the Met may have referred this to the Local Authority trading standards or Highways team as some correspondence that I have come across confirmed that council officials attended but were unable to identify any for sale signs displayed in the vehicles in question making it harder to prove[/FONT]


Secondly, in the same correspondence, there were photographs that were taken of alleged selling of vehicles. Most, if not all were taken in (neighbouring road) and not (this road). Maybe that is where the problem exists. As no new restrictions are going to happen there, I presume it will just continue.


[FONT=&quot]The evidence gathered in this regard focused on (neighbouring road) as our source had a clearer view of the activity on this road more that (this road). However, my own direct investigations in May, June and July this year were centred on (this road) which is a bit more difficult to detect as the vehicles being sold could easily pass off as a residents personal car, so if we don’t issue permits for these vehicles they will clearly stand out making it easier for us to detect and to also disrupt the trade and pass clearer information to the statutory agencies [/FONT]

In the end, nothing will change that cannot be rectified under the present arrangements. As far as I am aware nobody has not ever been able to park in the street when they have wanted to. All that will happen is that it will cause more inconvenience for the residents and their visitors. It will also mean more 'red tape' for yourselves as people complain about the parking company who will be adding to the their profits, with no 'rewards' for (Management Company), unless the PPC are paying (Management company) a small percentage of any charges they receive.

[FONT=&quot]We widely use car park management companies on our estate and (Management company) and its staff do not receive any rewards or percentage of any revenue generated by these companies, they are solely used to maintain orderliness in our car parks. We also aim to minimise or eliminate any form of inconvenience to our residents and we will continue to work with are residents in order to identify and address any such issues as they arise. I believe the system would work well so long as permits are clearly displayed at all times.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]On one of my estates with 60 residents and only 12 parking spaces we use a firm that issues resident permits at £10 a year and £15 visitors permit booklets with various time limits advised and in many instances there are few or no bays at all for visitors meaning there would have no choice but to make alternative arrangements.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]It is also important to note that although we own a car park where residents have non-exclusive access and use of and as part of our responsibilities we will look to maintain the car park and manage the car park for our residents use but I note some may see it as idea if we could accommodate visitor’s requirements but the reality is that we are not responsible for their visitors transport facilities or transport needs meaning if visitors can not park on (this road) with a permit then they may have to make alternative arrangements[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Many thanks[/FONT]

Using the other estate where there are charges is presumably a red herring, but maybe a warning that maybe the future for us? There is enough parking spaces here for residents and visitors (and for car salesmen!!). Incidentally it is not a car park as such, it is a strip of road between the main road and the kerbside which runs along both sides of the street to allow parking at right angles to the road.

bazster

You're getting nowhere with this character. Send him your "I'm not displaying a permit and that's that" letter and prepare to cost Park Direct UK £27 at PoPLA over and over again. They'll soon get fed up with it.

I-LOV-MONEY

I have already said that I don't want to opt in to the scheme.

The reply I got (previously posted) was

[FONT=&quot]Finally, I understand from some of your communications that you do not wish to be included in the parking control scheme but it is important to note that all we aim to achieve is orderliness in the car park by eliminating commercial activity, tackling un-roadworthy and untaxed vehicles as if we allow these issues to continue and only look to deal with them as they arise then it means we incur further cost that would have to be apportioned to residents, we would rather deter or prevent these issues from arising in the first instance as it helps to keep cost in dealing with them low. I would like to encourage you to obtain a free residents/visitors parking permit in readiness for 11th September[/FONT]

Once they have noted my car and determined that it belongs to a resident and roadworthy and taxed (how are they going to check the latter after October 1st?) basically they would be stupid to keep on ticketing it !

Presumably to check a vehicle has a MOT they have to check each one online (as presumably they will be able to do for tax). Out of interest how much does it cost them to apply to DVLA for the RK's details? (Will they enquire every time they see it ?!!)

bod1467

I-LOV-MONEY wrote: »

Out of interest how much does it cost them to apply to DVLA for the RK's details? (Will they enquire every time they see it ?!!)

DVLA charge £2.50 for electronic access enquiries (I believe). The cost is higher for paper access.

Unless they're keeping your details for the purposes of a whitelist (which is the only reason why I can think they would even need to store your details), then ICO rules state that they must apply separately for each instance where they require them - they cannot (legally) store your details to use for multiple "tickets".