Parking stories in the News/media

Coupon-mad

One in five motorists hit by PCNs last year:

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/cars/article-12683191/amp/One-five-motorists-hit-parking-fines-year.html

85% of which were not on-street.  Thus pretty much all the 85% were PPCs.

Exposes the lie of PPC World's misleading stat: '99.7% of drivers are compliant' drivel that they spout at every opportunity!

Coupon-mad

Fruitcake said:

Not a private parking issue, but still proof that even ANPR cameras that are "an approved device" are still not fit for purpose when there are no manual checks carried out by human beans.

ULEZ photo FAIL: Furious driver is sent London green zone fee for his car that is off the road... after camera captured a council van's licence plate but failed to snap the full registration number (msn.com)

The infamous case of the KNITTER lady comes to mind.

And what about this one: fined by a Council for DRIVING PAST a parked van:

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/23875245.drivers-anger-blackburn-council-wrongful-parking-fine/

Camera enforcement yet again.

Umkomaas

1505grandad said:

https://www.contestorlegal.co.uk/blog-3/parking-wars-how-contestor-legal-services-parked-bw-legal-and-pps-in-the-no-win-zone-

Despite the usual flowery language I thought this was interesting (logo):-

"Channeling(sic) the landmark case of ParkingEye v Beavis, Mr. Yamba accentuated the court's duty in assessing parking ticket fairness. Given PPS's signage flaunting the BPA logo, they were unequivocally bound by the BPA Code of Practice. This mandated PPS to grant a £20 discount for registration blunders. With our client's registration being recognised yet incomplete, PPS's neglect in offering this discount was a blatant breach of the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

The court, swayed by Mr. Jackson Yamba's compelling arguments, delivered a verdict in our client's favor. PPS's claim was thrown out, and they were slapped with the costs.

Pretty odd, as PPS are IPC AOS members, so what has the BPA Code of Practice got to do with the price of fish. Perhaps the 'esteemed' one isn't as all over this stuff as is suggested?

Whatever2023

Coupon-mad said:

One in five motorists hit by PCNs last year:

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/cars/article-12683191/amp/One-five-motorists-hit-parking-fines-year.html

85% of which were not on-street.  Thus pretty much all the 85% were PPCs.

Exposes the lie of PPC World's misleading stat: '99.7% of drivers are compliant' drivel that they spout at every opportunity!

The One in five will largely relate to LA on street & car parks as it’s cheap as chips if you incur a PCN, especially as the chances of being detected are slim. 

Coupon-mad

Whatever2023 said:

Coupon-mad said:

One in five motorists hit by PCNs last year:

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/cars/article-12683191/amp/One-five-motorists-hit-parking-fines-year.html

85% of which were not on-street.  Thus pretty much all the 85% were PPCs.

Exposes the lie of PPC World's misleading stat: '99.7% of drivers are compliant' drivel that they spout at every opportunity!

The One in five will largely relate to LA on street & car parks as it’s cheap as chips if you incur a PCN, especially as the chances of being detected are slim. 

Ah ... but it doesn't relate to those.

This is primarily PPCs. Where do you think the deplorable 12 million unfair private PCNs per annum are going...surely not to 0.3% of the driving population?

There are about 38 million cars on the road. MOST PEOPLE HAVE HAD A PRIVATE PCN.

Reading the article:

Only 15% of these PCNs were on-street.

85% were car parks, which included Supermarkets, workplaces, retail, town centre and Airports & stations. All the happy hunting grounds of ANPR ParkingSharksRUs.

We concur with the Government that this rogue industry is in 'market failure'.

Parking firms exploit people, IMHO, and the bulk litigators make the resulting consumer harm ten times worse.

Do you agree?

What are your thoughts about that phrase 'market failure'?

It certainly stung someone at the Webinar. Bless.  Don't they know what an IA is or the limited reasons that lead to one?

Wonder what they expected the rationale behind this IA would be stated to be, in a case where an entire industry has caused such immense consumer harm that the Government has been forced to regulate them?

It's quite funny, raises a wry smile because the parking industry forced this IA into the mix yet they are now bleating because it's been drafted (as expected, if you know what an IA is), citing 'market failure'. Of course!

Finally, £50 or £70 PCNs may look as 'cheap as chips' (your phrase) to parking firm and bulk legal fat cats who can afford yachts, supercars and expensive holidays, paid for by disabled, elderly, cash-strapped families and other vulnerable victims that the industry see as fair game.

Getting a nasty shock of a £50 or £70 PCN is far from "cheap" to us mere mortals, who make an honest living that doesn't "extort money" from others.

I don't know how PPC directors sleep at night. They should be ahamed.

Coupon-mad

Councillor gets a PCN at Morrisons Brentford:
http://www.brentfordtw8.com/default.asp?section=info&page=ballymore058.htm

He sounds a bit clueless.  They think these are fines. The locals seem to be sleepwalking into court claims or giving up and paying.

Anyone local enough to point him in the right direction and show him the DLUHC's draft IA and new Code?

Coupon-mad

Clueless comments on this article:

https://www.gazetteandherald.co.uk/news/23882186.wiltshire-pensioners-fined-chippenham-train-station/

And a tone deaf response from APCOA and the TOC, GWR.

Town councillor David Poole agreed that “leeway” should be given to customers using the station.

He added: “Dropping people off and picking them up is a bit of a problem, without knowing the ins and outs it concerns me when companies are quick to issue parking fines.

“When you’re elderly you need more time so there should be some leeway, people having problems with fines puts them off coming into Chippenham which is a problem.”

GWR explained that, in this case, the couple outstayed both the parking period and a significant grace period. They also highlighted that other car parks are available within the vicinity of the train station.

A spokesperson said:

“Having reviewed this with APCOA, who manage our car parks, the car was parked in the 20-minute short stay for just under an hour; going beyond the 20 minutes and a significant period of grace. Chippenham does offer significant amounts of parking, including disabled spaces close to the entrance for those with reduced mobility.

“The parking fine has been issued correctly, and we have to ensure that all users of the car park are treated fairly.”

The guy is 88 and frail.

Equality Act, anyone?

The BPA must be so proud.

Umkomaas

The esteemed Jacob has been at it again as Contestor report a strike out of CPMS and BWL's case as a result of woeful POC. £840 costs awarded against CPMS. They're pretty small fry, and that cost order will sting. Might make them rethink roboclaiming!

https://www.contestorlegal.co.uk/blog-3/ducking-and-weaving-through-car-park-managements-legal-jabs-with-bw-legal-how-to-float-like-a-butterfly-and-not-get-punched-by-parking-penalties-

TomOrrow

Umkomaas said:

The esteemed Jacob has been at it again as Contestor report a strike out of CPMS and BWL's case as a result of woeful POC. £840 costs awarded against CPMS. They're pretty small fry, and that cost order will sting. Might make them rethink roboclaiming!

https://www.contestorlegal.co.uk/blog-3/ducking-and-weaving-through-car-park-managements-legal-jabs-with-bw-legal-how-to-float-like-a-butterfly-and-not-get-punched-by-parking-penalties-

Fascinating. Thanks for yet another learning opportunity in understanding this legalised robbery business. Car parking "charges" industry is like the proverbial iceberg with so much hidden on first look. I was almost mugged by ECP over a keying error but rescued by advice and info from this forum. I've since discovered how fortunate I was to land on this particular section of Martin Lewis site and now I'm discovering the commercial side to fighting PCP companies.

Contestor seem to be the market's response to legal protection being out of the financial reach of the average Jo.
 Interesting puff on their About Us section where they big up links to the very company who work for the robbers.
"Many have donned the roles of Solicitors and Barristers overseas and have served as Senior Paralegals at esteemed UK firms, such as BW Legal". 
A big thanks again to all on this forum who give their time and expertise for no monetary reward. This definitely makes the advice here more trustworthy.

Snakes_Belly

I would say that 'market failure'? means that the PPC's have not provided the public and clients with the service that is required. Parking should help business in the high street and not damage it.