Misleading signage?

Scrapit

Fruitcake said:

Scrapit said:

If some people out after lockdown is too much for you do you think battling a ppc is good idea?

I don't understand the question.

How does seeing "some people out after lockdown" who could transmit a life threatening disease have any bearing or effect on typing a few words on a computer in a safe covid free environment at home, assisted by a supportive community?

The OP has not done anything wrong. They have completely complied with the contract requirements displayed on the signage at the site, yet are being unfairly punished for doing so.
I would be outraged by this behaviour and would want to put a stop to it.
The anger and stress of being falsely accused of a "crime" they did not commit may well be greater than the mild stress caused by fighting it.

Agreed completely, but somebody who is stressed out to the point they need a moment and a brew at the fact that some people are out and about after lockdown doesnt strike me as the sort of person up to the challenge of battling against a ppc with harrassing and threatening legal letters and pending court appearances. Its for the OP to decide if they are capable, certainly not for anybody else on this forum from behind their computer screens to decide.

Coupon-mad

But it's an easy one even to win at IAS!

Scrapit

Coupon-mad said:

Yes it does seem snowflake-like to need a cup of tea just to go to a shop, but it's an easy one even to win at IAS!

Thats not gonna help win them round.

Fruitcake

Scrapit said:

Fruitcake said:

Scrapit said:

If some people out after lockdown is too much for you do you think battling a ppc is good idea?

I don't understand the question.

How does seeing "some people out after lockdown" who could transmit a life threatening disease have any bearing or effect on typing a few words on a computer in a safe covid free environment at home, assisted by a supportive community?

The OP has not done anything wrong. They have completely complied with the contract requirements displayed on the signage at the site, yet are being unfairly punished for doing so.
I would be outraged by this behaviour and would want to put a stop to it.
The anger and stress of being falsely accused of a "crime" they did not commit may well be greater than the mild stress caused by fighting it.

Agreed completely, but somebody who is stressed out to the point they need a moment and a brew at the fact that some people are out and about after lockdown doesnt strike me as the sort of person up to the challenge of battling against a ppc with harrassing and threatening legal letters and pending court appearances. Its for the OP to decide if they are capable, certainly not for anybody else on this forum from behind their computer screens to decide.

I don't see the correlation between someone being stressed when out in the open, and fighting an unregulated parking scammer from the comfort and safety of their own home.
The two situations are completely different so I don't see why you think someone affected by one scenario should have a problem in a completely different situation. 
Someone who has agoraphobia has no problems dealing with problems whilst indoors.
Someone who has a fear of heights will have no problems dealing with a problem on the ground.

You seem to be of the opinion that someone faced with a possible risk of infection in a crowded shop will also have a problem dealing with a completely different problem in an infection free environment completely under their control.
Your suggestions just doesn't make sense to me at all.

Scrapit

Fruitcake said:

Scrapit said:

Fruitcake said:

Scrapit said:

If some people out after lockdown is too much for you do you think battling a ppc is good idea?

I don't understand the question.

How does seeing "some people out after lockdown" who could transmit a life threatening disease have any bearing or effect on typing a few words on a computer in a safe covid free environment at home, assisted by a supportive community?

The OP has not done anything wrong. They have completely complied with the contract requirements displayed on the signage at the site, yet are being unfairly punished for doing so.
I would be outraged by this behaviour and would want to put a stop to it.
The anger and stress of being falsely accused of a "crime" they did not commit may well be greater than the mild stress caused by fighting it.

Agreed completely, but somebody who is stressed out to the point they need a moment and a brew at the fact that some people are out and about after lockdown doesnt strike me as the sort of person up to the challenge of battling against a ppc with harrassing and threatening legal letters and pending court appearances. Its for the OP to decide if they are capable, certainly not for anybody else on this forum from behind their computer screens to decide.

I don't see the correlation between someone being stressed when out in the open, and fighting an unregulated parking scammer from the comfort and safety of their own home.
The two situations are completely different so I don't see why you think someone affected by one scenario should have a problem in a completely different situation. 
Someone who has agoraphobia has no problems dealing with problems whilst indoors.
Someone who has a fear of heights will have no problems dealing with a problem on the ground.

You seem to be of the opinion that someone faced with a possible risk of infection in a crowded shop will also have a problem dealing with a completely different problem in an infection free environment completely under their control.
Your suggestions just doesn't make sense to me at all.

Why?
Can you not see that someone having a borderline panic attack because randoms are going about their lawful business correlates to someone not best placed to embark on a legal challenge lasting up to six years involving threats, intimidation and harassment letters from ruthless companies that operate on the edge of the law?
It begs the question; how can you not see that?

Le_Kirk

Fruitcake said:

The sign quite clearly states that,
VEHICLES PARKED IN A DISABLED BAY/PARENT & CHILD BAY MUST EITHER:
CLEARLY DISPLAY A VALID BLUE BADGE IN THE WINDSCREEN AT ALL TIMES,
OR BE ACCOMPANIED OUT OF THE VEHICLE BY A CILD 12 YEARS OLD OR UNDER.
The car was parked in a gimmick  parent and child bay, and fulfilled the requirements on the sign by displaying a blue badge all the time the vehicle was parked.
I believe the man on the Clapham Omnibus would agree with my interpretation of the words in bold.
The scammers had no business obtaining the keeper's data in the first place.
Complain to the store manager and/or the CEO (nobody lower down). 
Complain to the DVLA as well. This was both a data breach and a KADOE contract breach. The NTK has omitted half of the Ts and Cs displayed on the sign and only issued a charge based on the other half. 
Complain to the IPC that a PCN has been issued when the Ts and Cs were clearly not breached.

I am afraid that the PPC (on this occasion, not the motorist) have shot themselves in the foot as the oblique "/" stands for OR, therefore, as @Coupon-mad states "contra proferentem" stands.

Ralph-y

OP ... please follow the regular forum posters advice and you will win this ...

Ralph

MummyNeedingAdvice

Ralph-y said:

OP ... please follow the regular forum posters advice and you will win this ...

Ralph

Thank you @Ralph-y - I did!

Good evening @Coupon-mad @Fruitcake@Le_Kirk  I would like to thank you all for your good advice regarding the PCN. I wrote to the CEO & Company secretary of the Co-op on Saturday night using the guidance and phrases mentioned.

Today I received a letter from the Company secretary confirming that they will be cancelling the notice. - this is great news as means I don’t have the hassle of dealing with IAS. I will of course continue with the complaint to the DVLA as suggested.

 

@Scrapit I have read the exchange of messages regarding my capacity to deal with this notice & I am sure that your concern was well meaning.

For info, I found it interesting how quickly judgements were made, assumptions on the basis of a couple of sentences I had written. We have all had very different experiences in the last 4 months which will inevitably cause people to act differently to each other. Personally I see taking the time, to acknowledge discomfort, as a strength as this space gives rise to better decisions.

Thanks again for all of your help and direction.

Fruitcake

Well done and thank you for letting us know. Do keep the correspondence from the Co op safe. It is not over until the parking scammers say it is over.

Umkomaas

Well done. Excellent result, glad it's turned out well for you, a nasty little monkey off your back. 

Most regular contributors come here to help. There are some (often short-lived) posters whose contributions seem more targeted at disruption/undermining of those who put hundreds of hours a month into providing free of charge real help to those who are shocked/traumatised/intimidated by organisations trying to fleece them of hard-earned money in order to enrich themselves. Nothing offered, just set up to penalise the public, hiding behind contrived, self-serving rules and regulations, and supposed 'contract law'!  Over 8 million tickets issued in the past 12 months.