Don't get Done, get Dom.

Ivor_Pecheque

Don't get Done, get Dom

Exposing the links between BPA funding and the industry, and funding of POPLA by BPA.

Also exposure of "notices" dressed as fines.

Wonder if Mr Troy knows the definition of "threatening."

bod1467

Worth catching up on Iplayer?

Ivor_Pecheque

Parking Prankster was interviewed.

Some rather worrying case studies, including that of a lady who dropped her husband of at The Royal Free Hospital Received, and paid, a charge to Parking Eye. Worrying that the hospital itself refunded the money to her eventually.

Great for the individual, not a good use of patients money I'm afraid.

Fight_the_good_fight

Not a good showing from the prankster,not only mentioning the F word twice, but came across as an eccentric and not someone who you would turn to if you did not know the good work he actually does.i am aware such shows are heavily edited but if going on camera to highlight issues you need to stick to the script and not be sidetracked on anecdotal,sensationalism reporting.

bazster

So so show.

Dom's reference to bailiffs was unfortunate, implying that it could happen when we all know it never does, and even worse he mentioned bailiffs before he mentioned court, and did not explain that for the former to possibly happen the latter must happen first!

It was also unfortunate that Pranky's piece gave the impression that court action is inevitable, when the reality is it's very, very unlikely.

Also disagreed with the woman from the RAC Foundation stating, as a fact, that parking on private land means entering into a contract.

't'was good that Dom refused to let Trouserfire wriggle off the hook, although it would've been good for him to be picked up on his lies about them wanting to hear about bad practice (when we all know that they hear about bad practice daily and they simply brush it off)

They managed to find a pair of victims entirely typical of the majority of dopes who simply pay up. Wonder what made Smart pay off the geezer? Sounds like they got a good kicking from the retailer or the landowner.

arthurx1234

Fight_the_good_fight wrote: »

Not a good showing from the prankster,not only mentioning the F word twice, but came across as an eccentric and not someone who you would turn to if you did not know the good work he actually does.i am aware such shows are heavily edited but if going on camera to highlight issues you need to stick to the script and not be sidetracked on anecdotal,sensationalism reporting.

Anyone who is a stranger to this and other forums would say he was an eccentric as soon as he mentioned that, "his car was not there it was a hologram" and "it wasn,t a car it was a cake"

His website does have useful info, so he gets my vote as one of the goodguys, but not a good performance by him, Dom didn't exactly go for the jugular either. Did he ask the question why PPC,s are not regulated, i must have missed it if he did

Arthur

Guys_Dad

arthurx1234 wrote: »

Anyone who is a stranger to this and other forums would say he was an eccentric as soon as he mentioned that, "his car was not there it was a hologram" and "it wasn,t a car it was a cake"
Come on - that was an answer to "Why are you called the Parking Prankster" and he did say that was what he did initially.
His website does have useful info, so he gets my vote as one of the goodguys, but not a good performance by him, Dom didn't exactly go for the jugular either. Did he ask the question why PPC,s are not regulated, i must have missed it if he did. Are you asking this tongue in cheek? If so, then those who missed the show won't get it. If not, then watch again !

Arthur

I thought that on the whole, for a BBC "investigative" programme, it was ok. Dom highlighted the problem (wish he had mentioned the IPC/IAS} and he did make the point that the BPA and POPLA were not, in his view, independent.

Look - any programme that hits at the Private Parking operators just adds weight to the exposure of the problem and reaches a wider audience. Both this programme and Watchdog last night made the point that (a) only courts can fine you and (b) the tickets are not fines, only invoices.

Hot_Bring

Just watched this on catch up and wanted to defend the Prankster. He put a good case across ( despite using the word fine ! ).

My only bug bear was the stickers Dom displayed on cars which used the word 'penalty' and then he went on to say PPCs couldn't issue penalties.

Of course the slime bag that is Patrick Troy was his usual lying self.

Ivor_Pecheque

Thought Pranky got his point across well. He explained some of the "darker" side of the industry, whilst explaining his motivations, which is, to help people. Power to his elbow :-)