Another great catch by PE

Northlakes

Our friends at PE had a great catch recently in Morrisons Penrith.

http://i1060.photobucket.com/albums/t441/watchkeeper57/PE085_zpsmsyitquw.jpg

The_Deep

You would have thought that someone in PE would have telephoned Morrisons and asked them what to do. This sort of thing could cost them £1000s, and will probably lead to PE losing its franchise.

Guys_Dad

The_Deep wrote: »

You would have thought that someone in PE would have telephoned Morrisons and asked them what to do. This sort of thing could cost them £1000s, and will probably lead to PE losing its franchise.

Would you really have expected PE to do that? Your naivety in this matter surprises me, The Deep . You know better than that. :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

bazster

"Incorrectly programmed" my a**e, it's just PE doing what PE does.

Northlakes

Interestingly this Morrisons car park has a planning condition attached which states that the consent was given on the understanding that the terms and conditions would be free for two hours of use with terms no more onerous than those of the council car parks.

The council penalty amount is a maximum of £70 with a half rate for charges paid in 14 days and same half rate applied even in the event of an unsuccessful appeal. These T&C's look far less 'onerous' than the PE rate of £85 and the a reduced rate being lost on appeal.

Eden District Council has been reminded about these planning conditions on numerous occasions but given the Beavis appeal case (where it referred to local parking T&C's) these planning conditions need to be upheld in order to reign-in the profit aspirations of the various PPC's in the district..
Full wording of planning condition as follows,

5) The car park shall be available to the public for the first two hours free of charge or on terms not more onerous than those payable for use of the town centre car parks at Southend Road and Blue Bell Lane. A management plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Council prior to the re-opening of the supermarket detailing any charging regime and method of enforcement and the plan shall be implemented in full when the supermarket is open. Any variation to the car park management plan must receive the prior written approval of the local planning authority. Reason - To ensure the proper functioning of the car park servicing the supermarket and the Penrith town centre.

The_Deep

Guys_Dad wrote: »

Would you really have expected PE to do that? Your naivety in this matter surprises me, The Deep . You know better than that. :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Yes GD, I would. I would have thought that any action which might cause embarassment to their employer, and harm their profits, would be considered before being embarked upon.

I realise that they are a sister company to TVL, but, as they have recently lost a Tesco car park, they might consider the consequence when dealing unfairly with supermarkets' customers. Is there no one in Capita with an eye on the bottom line?

The_Slithy_Tove

How many DVLA requests were granted without reasonable cause? Sounds like a serious DPA breach to me. What, PE breaking the law? Nothing new then.

bazster

Northlakes wrote: »

5) The car park shall be available to the public for the first two hours free of charge or on terms not more onerous than those payable for use of the town centre car parks at Southend Road and Blue Bell Lane. A management plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Council prior to the re-opening of the supermarket detailing any charging regime and method of enforcement and the plan shall be implemented in full when the supermarket is open. Any variation to the car park management plan must receive the prior written approval of the local planning authority. Reason - To ensure the proper functioning of the car park servicing the supermarket and the Penrith town centre.

That is almost word-for-word identical to the planning condition that got PE kicked out of Aldi Dunstable (not that a penny has ever been repaid to the motorists who were unlawfully charged before PE were kicked out).

Guys_Dad

The_Deep wrote: »

Yes GD, I would. I would have thought that any action which might cause embarassment to their employer, and harm their profits, would be considered before being embarked upon.

I realise that they are a sister company to TVL, but, as they have recently lost a Tesco car park, they might consider the consequence when dealing unfairly with supermarkets' customers. Is there no one in Capita with an eye on the bottom line?

Now that would be the action of a proper reputable ethical company or a paid up member of responsible humanity. However in the world of the profit grabbing PPC...................

The_Deep

Now that would be the action of a proper reputable ethical company or a paid up member of responsible humanity. However in the world of the profit grabbing PPC

It would also be in the best interests of their shareholders. Far more important imo than ethics and responsibility.

bazster

Doesn't say much for PE's signs that 50 people in one evening managed not to see them.