Parking Ticket in Supermarket Car Park

jon81uk

KeithP said:

jon81uk said:

Half_way said:

Unless the supermarket installed ANPR cameras that detect a person with a disability in a vehicle the system is discriminatory by nature.


As for the nothing to do with us contact the parking company, it has everything to do with them, this is an outright lie.
The supermarket is jointly liable for the actions of this parking company, and that includes any GDPR breaches, discrimination and so on that the parking company may do

Why would the ANPR be discriminatory?

Because it is not making the reasonable adjustments demanded by the Equality Act 2010.

But what has that got to do with ANPR?

If the policy of the car park is a flat maximum stay of two hours irrespective of who is using the space or their circumstances it makes no difference if it is ANPR, barrier and ticket, pay and display, attended or whatever method of enforcement.

The point that a supermarket should offer difference users different lengths of stay is a valid arguement, but has nothing to do with ANPR. 

I don't think I've come across stores offering different lengths of stay to different customers, but I haven't read the terms of parking.
There is a Waitrose near me that only allows an hour and a half parking, not sure if they give seperate dispensation to blue badge users other than offering them the spaces closest to the store.

KeithP

jon81uk said:

KeithP said:

jon81uk said:

Half_way said:

Unless the supermarket installed ANPR cameras that detect a person with a disability in a vehicle the system is discriminatory by nature.


As for the nothing to do with us contact the parking company, it has everything to do with them, this is an outright lie.
The supermarket is jointly liable for the actions of this parking company, and that includes any GDPR breaches, discrimination and so on that the parking company may do

Why would the ANPR be discriminatory?

Because it is not making the reasonable adjustments demanded by the Equality Act 2010.

But what has that got to do with ANPR?

Ah, sorry. I answered the wrong question.
It has nothing to do with ANPR.

It just demonstrates that the parking company, by using ANPR as an absolute measure of a car park stay, is making no attempt to fulfil it's obligations under the Equality Act 2010.

D_P_Dance

My wife had to wait over an hour for a prescription to be filled in our local supermarket recently,

jon81uk

KeithP said:

jon81uk said:

KeithP said:

jon81uk said:

Half_way said:

Unless the supermarket installed ANPR cameras that detect a person with a disability in a vehicle the system is discriminatory by nature.


As for the nothing to do with us contact the parking company, it has everything to do with them, this is an outright lie.
The supermarket is jointly liable for the actions of this parking company, and that includes any GDPR breaches, discrimination and so on that the parking company may do

Why would the ANPR be discriminatory?

Because it is not making the reasonable adjustments demanded by the Equality Act 2010.

But what has that got to do with ANPR?

Ah, sorry. I answered the wrong question.
It has nothing to do with ANPR.

It just demonstrates that the parking company, by using ANPR as an absolute measure of a car park stay, is making no attempt to fulfil it's obligations under the Equality Act 2010.

Does any private car park generally allow different lengths of stay for different users?

I'm not looking to argue, just curious as not ever noticed any car park that does this, therefore are all car parks with less than three hours stay guilty?

MobileSaver

jon81uk said:

I'm not looking to argue, just curious as not ever noticed any car park that does this, therefore are all car parks with less than three hours stay guilty?

I've just taken a look at the actual legislation. While many laws are "strict liability" (you either did it or you didn't, regardless of circumstances) the Equality Act laws are different in that an offence is only committed if someone "puts a disabled person at a substantial disadvantage".

So while an arbitrary 2 hr limit is clearly discriminatory against disabled people, a company is only guilty of an offence if they then substantially disadvantage that person.

In other words if a disabled person only shops for one hour then no offence, if a disabled person feels pressured to hurry around the shop to beat the 2 hour deadline then no offence, if the disabled person gets a parking charge which is subsequently cancelled when proof of disability is given then no offence.

However if a disabled person ends up having to pay a parking charge because the company refused to make reasonable adjustments then yes they are guilty of an offence.

Umkomaas

jon81uk said:

KeithP said:

jon81uk said:

KeithP said:

jon81uk said:

Half_way said:

Unless the supermarket installed ANPR cameras that detect a person with a disability in a vehicle the system is discriminatory by nature.


As for the nothing to do with us contact the parking company, it has everything to do with them, this is an outright lie.
The supermarket is jointly liable for the actions of this parking company, and that includes any GDPR breaches, discrimination and so on that the parking company may do

Why would the ANPR be discriminatory?

Because it is not making the reasonable adjustments demanded by the Equality Act 2010.

But what has that got to do with ANPR?

Ah, sorry. I answered the wrong question.
It has nothing to do with ANPR.

It just demonstrates that the parking company, by using ANPR as an absolute measure of a car park stay, is making no attempt to fulfil it's obligations under the Equality Act 2010.

Does any private car park generally allow different lengths of stay for different users?

I'm not looking to argue, just curious as not ever noticed any car park that does this, therefore are all car parks with less than three hours stay guilty?

Asda offer those requiring longer than the standard limit the opportunity to obtain the extension from the Customer Services desk. Asda are usually happy to arrange cancellation of almost all PCNs. 

MobileSaver said:

jon81uk said:

I'm not looking to argue, just curious as not ever noticed any car park that does this, therefore are all car parks with less than three hours stay guilty?

However if a disabled person ends up having to pay a parking charge because the company refused to make reasonable adjustments then yes they are guilty of an offence.

That's the typical case we advise on here.  PPCs obfuscate and rarely concede. But we don't see relevant motorists sufficiently motivated to press for judicial intervention. 

sarahj1990

Thanks for the replies. I have 14 days to pay the £50.00 fine otherwise it doubles. I want to find out if I appeal the ticket and am unsuccessful in the appeal will I still have x amount of time to pay the £50.00 fine. I looked on the website of the parking company and there is no information and I called them yesterday but it just an automated machine. Any advice appreciated.

Umkomaas

Which parking company?

sarahj1990

I have appealed the parking ticket. I have found out the information. If you appeal the ticket and are unsuccessful you get 14 days to pay the £50 fine. If the 1st appeal is unsuccessful and I make a 2nd appeal to POPLA (Parking on Private Land Appeals) and that appeal is unsuccessful then I would have to pay the full fine. Hopefully the 1st appeal will be successful.

Trainerman

It is not a fine and has no force in law, until/unless a Judge says different. Even if your PoPLA appeal fails, it is not binding on you. You could choose to see whether the PPC decide to try Court, though they do have six years in which to do this.