Nurses in Cardiff NHS face huge bills

TrickyWicky

You said "Ever" lol. I was merely pointing out that the use of the word ever was infact null because we once did give out that advice and it was daily. I used to try and help folks out with council PCNs (former CEO) but these days i just can't be bothered - we've all been stitched up.

I'm sad that this country continues to implode deliberately. It's as if the very people at the top hate their own country with an obsessive passion.

beamerguy

The joke of NHS Trusts

A follow up story by the Mail

Doctors and nurses are 'scared stiff' and 'broken' by court ruling they must pay £13m in parking fines run up at the hospital where they work say campaigners

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4705494/Court-rules-doctors-nurses-pay-13m-fines.html

And in the same newspaper today
NHS needs to recruit 2,000 more foreign doctors to meet its staff targets says top health official

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-4705526/NHS-needs-recruit-2-000-foreign-doctors.html

WAKEY WAKEY JEREMY HUNT

DoaM

TrickyWicky wrote: »

You said "Ever" lol.

Using the word "ever" with a present tense verb (gives) means the context remains in the present tense. Your counterargument thus fails.

Sicard

smjxm09 wrote: »

Maybe some of them was following the advice here that private parking companies issues parking charges was not enforceable. Seems that it is.

This explains it in a nicer more consumer friendly way than the rude wally who quoted you:

Private companies can issue parking tickets and may call them Parking Charge Notices, but they are not the same as the Penalty Charge Notice.
They are not backed up by law. Instead, they are invoices for a breach of contract.
If the car park operator wants to force you to pay, they will need to take you to the civil court, which is costly and time-consuming.
If the car park operator takes you to court and wins, you then have pay the costs in addition to the original charge. If you lose and still refuse to pay, you could find the judgment going on to your credit file and damaging your chances of borrowing or taking out contracts, such as for mobile phones.

Sicard

I can't understand why the Trusts would not hire a couple of enforcers and take the profits like some hospitals do. Also a system of paying on exit is much fairer than a nurse having to pay an accruing incremental time-governed penalty fine by having to stay behind to save someone's life.

This whole thing smacks of mere profiteering for the sake of penalising people who devote their lives to helping and saving lives who are paid a pittance. Yes, yes, (before the baying wolves close in) I know the company which is run by psychopaths with no consciences have to make a profit etc, but this was a step too far.

beamerguy

Sicard wrote: »

I can't understand why the Trusts would not hire a couple of enforcers and take the profits like some hospitals do. Also a system of paying on exit is much fairer than a nurse having to pay an accruing incremental time-governed penalty fine by having to stay behind to save someone's life.

This whole thing smacks of mere profiteering for the sake of penalising people who devote their lives to helping and saving lives who are paid a pittance. Yes, yes, (before the baying wolves close in) I know the company which is run by psychopaths with no consciences have to make a profit etc, but this was a step too far.

You are right of course. My local hospital has pay on exit with machines at all exits.
It's not the cheapest but at least you know where you stand.
If the hospital makes a profit, that's fine.
Why do they use parking vermin like Indigo

This Cardiff hospital could have stopped this but they did not
do their homework on parking scammers and the solicitors who
go to bed with the cowboys

The judge did not do her homework either

TW1234

I thought that the Trust had leased the land---full stop. (Some 20 years ago)
Not just contracted parking management to the PPC.
I am not even sure whether Indigo were the leaseholders.

If that is the case,the parking would be no different to a parking company operating on its own land in any manner it chose.
How the Trust could issue permits, though, is also unclear, without sight of the lease.

pappa_golf

yes it was leased , yes the lease ends in 2018 , seems the hospital issued the permits , I cannot see if they were a chargable item or not

bargepole

pappa_golf wrote: »

yes it was leased , yes the lease ends in 2018 , seems the hospital issued the permits , I cannot see if they were a chargable item or not

The staff are not charged for the permits. They have to pay £1.05 a day to park in a designated car park, for which there are about five times as many permits issued as there are spaces.

There was also an issue over the time taken between applying for a permit and receiving one, in some cases as long as four months.

Most of the PCNs in question in this case, were issued because staff parked in a different car park, or hadn't yet received their permit. There were also some instances of pay machines not working.

pappa_golf

yup I picked up on some of that , also floating aroud the "interweb" is the fact that the cases may have been brought to court by a company who,s name was not on the lease , however those seem to be rumours (untill verified)