How can the law assume we've entered contracts, assume we see signs?

onlyfoolsandparking

steve1500 wrote: »

Also obtaining information from the DVLA when not complying with the Data Protection Act .


I guess their defence would be, didn't realise we had to comply, bit like didn't realise we had to get planning permission for all our signs etc

Thanks for that Steve, yes I forgot that VERY important one, there's probably still more!

Coupon-mad

Dean000000 wrote: »

Because....

The alternative is having a manned station, getting you to sign a contract stating you can park here for x amount of money for x amount of time.

The cost of that service would have to be included in any parking charge - meaning your £1.20/hr would rise to £15.20/hr....

They are offing a use of a commodity / asset for an amount of money (their offer) and by parking you are accepting their terms of use of their asset. (Your acceptance)

I can’t see how why so many don’t see it the same as me? I really don’t

No it isn't. You see it the same as a parking firm and IMHO it's a wrong view.

The REAL alternative is to remove the scammer, and not replace them at all.

I can promise you that Service Stations like Welcome Break will not become full of day trippers visiting as a destination of choice. People generally overstay because:

- they fall asleep as they are using it to rest

- they see no signs about any contract, often because it is dark/they are illegible

- they might be using half an hour (or more for electric vehicles) to attend to the vehicle and the load on a journey, e.g. getting fuel, water, queuing for air or even using the electric charging point, none of which is parking in the car park.

And yet the scammers' cameras just record the entry and exit and people get a PCN despite the DFT rule that driver MUST be allowed a minimum (not maximum) of a free two hours rest in the car park...not ''two hours all told on site''.

The DFT also wanted to include an option for people to pay for their extra hour etc., AFTER leaving - e.g.the next day, like congestion charges - and the DFT were very unhappy indeed about the penalty culture at MSAs. This was made very clear in their recommendations in a consultation document.

Several years ago the DFT sent out a consultation about MSA issues including parking - guess who one of the stakeholders was? Yep, the BPA. Guess what their position was? Yep. It was in the early days of PPC fighters like us, and the BMPA group, so no proper consumer group had a say at all and we only say the consultation after it had closed.

And hey presto, the DFT's concerns about the penalty culture had been trodden into the dirt by the money-grabbing PPCs with their snouts in the trough.

Dean000000

I know my views are in the minority, and won’t defend some of the underhand tactics these firms take - but my post was in response to why should a sign bind you to a contract....

Lemme flip it around then...and please endulge me....

How do you think these car parks should be managed? Genuinely?

How can say, a Parking firm lawfully set out their terms of business, to your satisfaction?

Coupon-mad

How do you think these car parks should be managed? Genuinely?

I am extreme in my view - I think the companies should not exist.

I ask you - why do you think most car parks need 'managing'?

Dean000000

Coupon-mad wrote: »

I am extreme in my view - I think the companies should not exist.

I ask you - why do you think most car parks need 'managing'?

Please answer my question....not with another question back to me. Please.

In a utopian (but realistic) world, how can car parks legally, and reasonably set out their terms of business, to your satisfaction?

I’m not talking about scammers, those with poor signage, and underhand tactics....

I talking about - how should a new, above board, whiter than white, new and improved type of car park operator set out their terms for general public to use their asset?

Coupon-mad

I disagree that there should be any such animal. Honestly, kill the industry completely.

In a utopian (but realistic) world, landowners/retailers themselves should simply use clear signs properly. If they need an income from the car park (not all do - e.g. Supermarkets and Hotels do not), have a pay on exit barrier. Minimum sum of, say £2.

Yes you would get some overstayers but the businesses would gain a captive audience. And EVERY driver would pay £2 at least, as opposed to at the moment with the free for all/misleading signs where drivers have no clue and some never see signs.

Honestly the vast majority of drivers are not out to avoid a £2 tariff or clear terms.

The idea of 'carmageddon' is a myth spouted by the parking firms, BPA and IPC.

onlyfoolsandparking

Dean000000 wrote: »

I know my views are in the minority, and won’t defend some of the underhand tactics these firms take - but my post was in response to why should a sign bind you to a contract....

Lemme flip it around then...and please endulge me....

How do you think these car parks should be managed? Genuinely?

How can say, a Parking firm lawfully set out their terms of business, to your satisfaction?

They should be managed with a 'Common sense' approach and from an ethical view point and nobody here would condone serial parking abusers.


Unfortunately its all about the money, Corporate greed where a select few get rich off the masses, at least with Council car parks they are (usually) more fairly priced with a genuine independent appeals service and one hopes that the income they generate goes towards supporting valuable services.

nigelbb

Dean000000 wrote: »

I know my views are in the minority, and won’t defend some of the underhand tactics these firms take - but my post was in response to why should a sign bind you to a contract....

Lemme flip it around then...and please endulge me....

How do you think these car parks should be managed? Genuinely?

How can say, a Parking firm lawfully set out their terms of business, to your satisfaction?

Pay car parks should all be managed with barriers on entry & exit. This works perfectly well for most multi-storey car parks & is impossible to evade paying or to pay too much.

The problem with Pay & Display car parks is that you need to guess how long you will be & if you are detained for any reason & inadvertently overstay then you are penalised out of all proportion to the legitimate extra parking fee. A few P&D car parks do have the facility to 'top-up' before leaving but this is a tiny minority.

Free car parks with a time limit should be very, very, very clearly signed. There should be prominent signs on the entrance & exit doors of the shops & restaurants served by the car park warning drivers of the time limit. There should be signs on the walls on the Gents. There should be a large billboard with T&Cs on entry to the car park that you literally must drive through so it's impossible to miss.

Car parks where there is a period of free parking followed by paid parking e.g. Motorway Service Areas should have barriers on entry & exit so that you need to take a ticket on entry & cannot exit without paying if a parking fee is due .

Le_Kirk

Motorway Service Areas should have barriers on entry & exit so that you need to take a ticket on entry & cannot exit without paying if a parking fee is due .

Can you imagine the queues to get off the motorway?

Coupon-mad

MSAs should be free for cars, IMHO; they really are not a destination of choice.

If someone needs 4 hours rest in the dark/early morning, then let them. What on earth harm are they doing, and they will be less tired when resuming driving.