The Other Side Of The Coin.

TDA

nigelbb wrote: »

Barriers ARE the solution for keeping disabled bays free. They just need a variant of the scheme that provides nationwide access to locked disabled toilets in public conveniences,

https://crm.disabilityrightsuk.org/radar-nks-key

Interesting.

nigelbb wrote: »

As for straddling two bays is that really such a big problem? Perhaps if the parking bays were bigger there would be fewer offenders? If it's a free car park then the supermarket offering the free parking should just suck it up as part of the price of doing business if they want to offer free parking to lure in customers just like they accept some shrinkage from shoplifters as the price of doing business if they want to allow shoppers to fill their own trolley.

Perhaps it has not been for you, but I'm personally fed up of not being able to park at my local Sainsbury's because of selfish individuals' parking. It's really not even close to difficult to park in one bay and if you can't manage it maybe £60 a pop will teach you. I have very little sympathy for such people.

Interestingly enough I often used to struggle to park at the same car park because it is right by the train station and would start filling up from 7:30 onwards with commuters. Euro came and put some ANPR in, the irony being that now genuine customers will get caught out by the time limit and half the time still won't be able to get a space because of inconsiderate nobs who aren't capable of (or don't care about) parking in a single bay.

Umkomaas

if you can't manage it maybe £60 a pop will teach you

A learning lesson from some private company who pockets the loot! I think your focus is somewhat blurred.

Once those 'taught a lesson' are 'educated' (by the likes of Trev Whitehouse and his ilk) and move on, the targets become those who never were, and never likely to be major problems.

In all the time I've helped hundreds of traumatised posters here and on Pepipoo, the number from that cohort you deem 'in need of being taught a lesson' I can count on no more than one hand!

TDA

Umkomaas wrote: »

A learning lesson from some private company who pockets the loot! I think your focus is somewhat blurred.

Once those 'taught a lesson' are 'educated' (by the likes of Trev Whitehouse and his ilk) and move on, the targets become those who never were, and never likely to be major problems.

In all the time I've helped hundreds of traumatised posters here and on Pepipoo, the number from that cohort you deem 'in need of being taught a lesson' I can count on no more than one hand!

I have no doubt that you will have helped more of those who have been caught up as a result of the minority of "problem parkers" as they are the ones most likely to seek help in handling an injustice. The ones in the wrong tend not to look for help too often because they assume they don't have a leg to stand on.

In any event, I think you misinterpret my post as advocating the current PPC model. I did state that I feel neither barriers nor the PPC model in its current form are satisfactory answers to every conceivable parking problem a landowner might have. There is a middle ground to be found and I think warden patrolled car parks have their place provided the industry is properly regulated by government, rather than having the buck passed to the purposefully ineffectual BPA.

Half_way

Wardens should be there to look after the general safety of the car park, and to help people find spaces.

A good few years ago i used to visit a car park belonging to a supermarket this was before the days of PPCs. To exit the car park you had to put a token in a slot and the barrier would lift - parking tokens were given out at the till free if you spent over a certain amount

A combination of barriers, bollards and meaningless unenforceable signage is by far a better solution than the PPC model.
you should be looking at securing your parking spaces if its private residential land and not issuing threat o grams via the main ppc methods.

Herzlos

TDA wrote: »

Interesting.



Perhaps it has not been for you, but I'm personally fed up of not being able to park at my local Sainsbury's because of selfish individuals' parking. It's really not even close to difficult to park in one bay and if you can't manage it maybe £60 a pop will teach you. I have very little sympathy for such people.

Interestingly enough I often used to struggle to park at the same car park because it is right by the train station and would start filling up from 7:30 onwards with commuters. Euro came and put some ANPR in, the irony being that now genuine customers will get caught out by the time limit and half the time still won't be able to get a space because of inconsiderate nobs who aren't capable of (or don't care about) parking in a single bay.

My car is a few inches longer then the spaces in my local supermarket and almost as wide. Should I pay £60 per visit for parking?

Also if it's meant to be a deterrent why is the money going to a private company and not the stores chosen charity sort of like a swear jar in an office.

neil.net

Herzlos wrote: »

Also if it's meant to be a deterrent why is the money going to a private company and not the stores chosen charity sort of like a swear jar in an office.

And if the only award in a breach of contract should only be damages, how are they able to actually make money...?

bod1467

neil.net wrote: »

And if the only award in a breach of contract should only be damages, how are they able to actually make money...?

Head of nail? Meet hammer.

Fergie76

TDA wrote: »

The whole you protect your door with a lock argument is not entirely analogous.

Bollards or chains on your parking space would be more akin to gating your driveway than having a lock on your door, and I don't think many would honestly suggest that people should have to install a gate on their driveway to prevent unwarranted access.

I was on my phone and hate typing on it. However, why I was trying to get at, is that you protect you home, so if you have a parking space, why not protect that too?

You don't leave your bicycle out unlocked, do you?

Umkomaas

The ones in the wrong tend not to look for help too often because they assume they don't have a leg to stand on.

There's no evidence to base that on, other than anecdote. But I rather suspect they either ignore all that's thrown at them (and have a shed full of PCNs and DRP threatograms) or most of them don't 'transgress' again.

I must admit my enthusiasm to help someone who comes back saying 'I've got another PCN, HELP, HELP, what can I do, will you do it all for me yet again' is rather less than that for helping a targeted cancer patient, an elderly person who believes they acquiesce to all forms of 'authority, or a widow who is ANPR'd when following the hearse carrying her husband out of the hospital car park.

Extreme cases to emphasise the point, but none unheard of.

Dr._Shoe

OK. I now admit this was an exercise to look at alternatives to PPC and I was playing devil's advocate. Let's look at the alternatives:

1. Barriers.
2. Self ticketing.
3. Unrestricted parking.
4. "No space, no car" like in Japan.

In my visit to my Daughter's a couple of weeks ago, he big thing I noticed was that there was nowhere within about a mile where anyone could park free of charge without running the risk of incurring the risk of one PPC or another. Now I'm guessing the one on my Daughter's estate was eiter "soft" or not patrolling so that all those in the area who either couldn't afford or couldn't be ars*d to get a council permit (£80 per year for the privilege of parking outside your own house apparently) or those who didn't qualify for either a private estate permit or a council one, parked on her estate.

Solutions:
1. You would need a key or some kind of passing field device to gain access to the carpark. This could work actually but the barrier still needs to be maintained. What happens if there's a power cut or a failure when you need to get out? I suppose croc teeth will solve that one and people could go PAD outside until it's fixed. It will need 24 hour call out for repairs etc. who would pay for that? An annual charge for the key perhaps?

2. Too many "Norrisses". People ticketing their neighbours in revenge for load music or other "anti-social" behaviours? Under a self ticket system one would have to report it to the regulators and some people don't like to snitch. Plus there's a fear that a bully might seek revenge against the ticketer...

3. The thought occurs that if there were no parking restrictions anywhere then there would be no parking problems! When I lived near my Daughter, I could park in my own road without a permit of any kind, I could park in her neighbourhood any time I wanted to and there were plenty of spaces around the edge of the park where you could park without parking in front of somebody's house. Now, all these roads are double yellowed and in the residential areas it's all permit holder parking. It was never overcrowded with parked cars either. The permit system is just to make money for the council.

4. It's already too late to bring in a "no space, no car" law like in Japan. Besides, what happens when you travel to another part of the country?

What needs to happen IMHO is that there should be a blanket ban on permit parking on the highway. Roadside PAD and meters should be banned, in other words all on street parking should be free of charge with yellow lines where safety and traffic flow require them. We should also place a cap on what council carparks are allowed to charge, This could be something like 40p per hour and there can be restrictions on the length of time people can park so you have long stay carparks and short stays. Next, there should be one space allocated for every flat in a block. Those without cars could then "sign over" their space to a neighbour. Then there should be a set percentage of visitors spaces. Policing should be done by council employees in the case of on street parking and council carparks and by the ownrs of the residential estates themselves but they can pay a contractor to do it on their behalf, a contractor who would have to forward all penalties to the site's owner with a cap on what they can charge. The site owner would be ultimately responsible for appeals.