Parking stories in the News/media

Coupon-mad

Quite a decent article by Rupert Bowers KC:

https://insights.doughtystreet.co.uk/post/102ike8/private-parking-charges-why-pay

Umkomaas

Coupon-mad said:

Quite a decent article by Rupert Bowers KC:

https://insights.doughtystreet.co.uk/post/102ike8/private-parking-charges-why-pay

Interesting, although nothing we don't know. Might be a good reference point for newbies who are dithering. He does seem to have underestimated the incidence of robo-litigation, that being considerably higher than he suggests. 

Trainerman

Kim said:
 “If I go to a supermarket and see the disabled parking is full, I have the option to drive to another supermarket. When I’m at the hospital, I can’t drive to another hospital, I have no choice.  I have stage four lung cancer and mobility is a major issue for me. I have a blue badge that allows me to park on double-yellow lines...

... I have been having treatment at the Royal Stoke. A few months ago I had to attend the cancer ward to get a blood transfusion. I was unable to find a parking space near the cancer ward entrance so I parked on double yellow lines but advised reception that I was blue-badged on double yellows.

She said it was OK and not to worry.

Two weeks ago, I parked on double yellows, again for a transfusion, and I had a ticket. I paid it immediately and then appealed. I assumed it was a mistake. I always park so I’m not causing an obstruction".

Shame on you:

BPA this is the sort of misery you facilitate.

APCOA took this dying man's money.

The Royal Stoke actually defended the issuing of the parking fine.  Atrocious! 

Lorraine Whitehead - shameless (and Equality Act clueless) Director of Estates, Facilities and PFI told the Mirror: “We are sorry if anyone visiting the Royal Stoke has difficulty finding a parking space..." blah blah APCOA ... (effectively) 'tough on the dying man'.  

And I'm not even copying the clueless comment by Mirror reader, 'Geoff N'.

There are some heartless idiots in this World.

 

I had to use this hospital a few times for special scans. The car park is nearly always 'heaving'. On one occasion, I was faced with the choice of miss appointment or park on double yellows ( but out of the way). 

I chose the double yellows, and explained my problem when I got to reception. The receptionist phoned the parking company right then, and then came back to me and said I would be alright as they "do not have a patrol around today"! 

Just the luck of the draw, I suppose. Mind you, that was around three years ago and it sounds like the Hospital itself is less helpful

Coupon-mad

Who thinks that Euro Car Parks may have 'suggested' to Morrisons that this Sidcup car park should have the 2 hour free parking time reduced to 90 minutes?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/katie-investigates/morrisons-fined-me-100-after-its-cafe-was-slow-serve-lunch/

Does anyone here ever believe Supermarkets when they say this?

"the supermarket it said it had recently reduced the time limit on its Sidcup branch car park after customers had complained it was hard to find a space during busy times."

No, the customers really didn't.

Utter balderdash!

And - come on - reducing parking time unreasonably so that their elderly and slower customers get 'fined' isn't a remedy, even if the so-called complaints were genuine.

Forgive me for my cynicism - AND I AM NOT SUGGESTING THAT ECP DO THIS - but we have read that same false excuse so often from clueless "our parking firm told us this, so it must be true" Supermarkets (same words about customers complaining, seen EVERY TIME) that it wouldn't surprise me at all, if some other more rogue ANPR parking firms ... might possibly make these complaints up...?

We already know that one of the dubious 'attractions' of these ANPR firms is that they boast that they provide Supermarkets with what they call 'rich data' (aka generic crap dressed up with buzzwords like 'improved footfall'). 

I would not be gobsmacked if it eventually turned out one day from a whistleblower, that some PPCs (naming none) might even make up such complaints as part of their 'reports' in order to force the arm of their utterly clueless retail 'partners'.

How very clever, eh, if any PPCs ever do the following?

A PPC could (in theory) Include in their regular reports to a credulous Supermarket Area Manager suit (who laps up every word from their 'new technology' giant) a section about 'concerns' which could very easily report non-existent issues designed to spook the Supermarket bod into thinking that customers have complained to their parking agents that "the car park is too busy"...

We all know that people don't complain about that to PPCs.

Just shut up Morrisons et al, and engage your brains before you reduce free parking time.  Jeez the big Supermarkets are deluded in their blind reliance on PPCs.

patient_dream

Coupon-mad said:

Who thinks that Euro Car Parks may have 'suggested' to Morrisons that this Sidcup car park should have the 2 hour free parking time reduced to 90 minutes?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/katie-investigates/morrisons-fined-me-100-after-its-cafe-was-slow-serve-lunch/

Does anyone here ever believe Supermarkets when they say this?

"the supermarket it said it had recently reduced the time limit on its Sidcup branch car park after customers had complained it was hard to find a space during busy times."

No, the customers really didn't.

Utter balderdash!

I wonder what the shareholders of Morrisons would say about this rubbish ....... restrictions = less sales = less profit = less shareholders bonuses .... could be the next CEO we see leave  for stupidity

Let's face it, Morrisons are struggling against their competition and the last thing they need is a greedy parking company dictating the rules.  

How stupid are Morrisons restricting customers, they need every penny they can get not give it to money scammers in their car park
Shareholders rely on professionls not idiots

Coupon-mad

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/maximum-car-park-penalty-may-be-cut-to-50/ar-AA1ex2ge?ocid=finance-verthp-feeds

Found this.
You can expand the article to read it.

Nellymoser

Coupon-mad said:

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/maximum-car-park-penalty-may-be-cut-to-50/ar-AA1ex2ge?ocid=finance-verthp-feeds

Found this.
You can expand the article to read it.

Raging....£80/£100 PCN in Scotland.

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/private-parking-code-of-practice-call-for-evidence
Haven't read it yet. Just how much evidence does this Gov need.

Le_Kirk

Coupon-mad said:

A PPC could (in theory) Include in their regular reports to a credulous Supermarket Area Manager suit (who laps up every word from their 'new technology' giant) a section about 'concerns' which could very easily report non-existent issues designed to spook the Supermarket bod into thinking that customers have complained to their parking agents that "the car park is too busy"...

Well, just keep going like that Morrisons and your car parks and your supermarkets won't be busy at all, they will be deserted!

Bookends

Morrisons, through their "parking management partner" tried to reduce the time allowed to park at one of their stores a while ago. When it was pointed out, via a story in local newspapers, that the planning permission/advertising consent (belatedyl applied for after another story in local papers!) had specifically stated the time limit they had to change their signs.

Coupon-mad

Nellymoser said:

Coupon-mad said:

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/maximum-car-park-penalty-may-be-cut-to-50/ar-AA1ex2ge?ocid=finance-verthp-feeds

Found this.
You can expand the article to read it.

Raging....£80/£100 PCN in Scotland.

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/private-parking-code-of-practice-call-for-evidence
Haven't read it yet. Just how much evidence does this Gov need.

I'm not raging.  Game on!

The DLUHC does need to go through this process.  There's no choice but to do this thoroughly because we've seen the PPCs' appetite for Judicial Reviews.

Need to read the draft IA before I post more but:

There are 5 options and the 5th one looks like there's no London or Scotland difference and the lowest rate matches that used at Tesco, Sainsbury's etc. It's also far less complicated.

My gut instinct is that I favour that one (the simple £100/£70 option 5) for lots of reasons as I think mirroring the LA model is a massive mistake that would come back to bite us.

I appreciate that my view may be controversial.

Obviously only option 3 or 5 is acceptable to right-thinking motorists because the 'fee' that encourages bulk litigation and doubles the spoils for the roboclaim leeches must be banned.