ParkingEye PCN - 1 hour max stay Service Station

KeithP

smith140920 said:

Putting the above aside for one minute.. can we ban the obvious trolls on this forum? My thread is a genuine one that I am hoping to keep updated as we move forward. I don't want this getting locked or removed because the angry men of the scamming industry are kicking up a fuss on it.

Have a look at the answer to the question How do I report an inappropriate, offensive, or racist post? in the MSE Forum Rules.

Castle

The planning applications filed at Wigan Council suggests that Euro Garages Ltd was the applicant for the site redevelopment in 2012 under ref A/12/76984.

(As expected I can't find any planning permission for the Cameras/Poles and advertising consent for the signs).

Fruitcake

Castle said:

The planning applications filed at Wigan Council suggests that Euro Garages Ltd was the applicant for the site redevelopment in 2012 under ref A/12/76984.

(As expected I can't find any planning permission for the Cameras/Poles and advertising consent for the signs).

In that case I suggest the OP complains to the council/planning department and their MP about this, as well as the BPA and DVLA.

D_P_Dance

Just an observation, but this forum appears to have one goal, and that is to assist motorists to ‘get off’ parking charges by hook or crook; regardless of whether the PCN was issued fairly or not.

But very few are issued fairly... Most are considerably more than local authority PCNS  and theire appeals set up is markedly less fair.  My wife collected three this year, all dismissed on appeal.  They rely on the stupid and the gullible to pay them.  

AnotherForumite

‘ Are you implying that my £100 parking fine for spending 1 hour in Starbucks is fair?’

Yes, absolutely; and so do the County Courts.
Had you felt that the charge for overstaying was excessive, you had the option to either leave before 1 hour had elapsed or leave and have a coffee elsewhere.

AnotherForumite

D_P_Dance said:

Just an observation, but this forum appears to have one goal, and that is to assist motorists to ‘get off’ parking charges by hook or crook; regardless of whether the PCN was issued fairly or not.

But very few are issued fairly... Most are considerably more than local authority PCNS  and theire appeals set up is markedly less fair.  My wife collected three this year, all dismissed on appeal.  They rely on the stupid and the gullible to pay them.  

Yes, and you only have to look at your average high street to see how much of a deterrent there is with such a low charge for an on street PCN i.e very little deterrent, it simply is not effective; and any LA will tell you that. Indeed, the powers that be are seeking to increase the LA charges in the near future (as well as introduce ANPR to off street parking).

Furthermore, LA’s are not permitted to make a profit; and no one is in business to break even. If you did a FOI request to your LA you will probably find that the fines dept run at a loss, but is subsided by parking revenue; many private operators have zero parking revenue.

Scrapit

Happyslappy said:

Coupon-mad said:

Parking firms are dangerous to people in this country and your industry needs to cull their conduct and greed, or end up culled.

In the grand scheme of things this is utter BS, you’re actually more stupid than I thought, and I thought a lot l.

What is the point you are trying to make?

Coupon-mad

many private operators have zero parking revenue.

In future, if the new Code gets it right, those (mostly ex-clampers) who have that mentality and approach, will either get banned or have to adapt and learn how to better 'manage' parking and monetise their car parks without relying upon penalties. 

Good parking management is not the same as parking enforcement.

Operating such that your revenue is all from 'fines' and slamming sites with £100 top whack charges to ordinary consumers who are going about their daily lives, is a hangover from clamping days (criminal offence, extortionate fines, running car parks like a protection racket 'free').

That ancient and rogue business model clearly incentivises PPCs to catch people out, hide the signs, issue as many PCNs as possible and basically operate in the scam way that led to the Knight Act.  

So, unless your firm is getting revenue other than from penalties, you have something to fear from the new Code, I hope, and need to start changing your contracts, charging a management fee and stop adding false 'debt recovery' sums to share with your debt collector and robo-claim mates.

AnotherForumite

So you appear to accept that it is not commercially viable to operate when charging at the rates used by Local Authorities.

I also note that you did not address the fact that such low charges offer zero deterrent and is thus an ineffective method of enforcement.

Maybe operators should be paid by the landowner for their services, no operator will argue with that, but you can’t blow against the wind; and why would a landowner pay for an ineffective service (given the pocket money charges 🤷🏼‍♂️).

D_P_Dance

Whether LA parking is profitable or not is neither here nor there imo,   However, IIMU that Reading Borough Council makes a huge amount from what are, imo, unnecessary bus lanes.  

https://www.inyourarea.co.uk/news/revealed-the-reading-bus-lanes-where-drivers-are-most-likely-to-be-caught/