Parking stories in the News/media

NCC1701-A

Jenni_D said:

NCC1701-A said:

Whatever2023 said:

The driver a) exceeded the consideration period and b) wasn’t reviewing/considering the terms of the contract (the purpose of the CP) in any event.

A grace period is added to a paid for / free parking period; therefore, does not apply to this matter.

I fail to see any error on the operators part.

Judges and barristers appear to disagree with your analysis, 

https://youtu.be/L2FXsxpm04E?si=m39_TuRw5Tk4yjLY

Following that link I only see:

Video unavailable

This video is private

🤷‍♀️

Bizare, it was by black belt barrister quoting Ashby V Tolhurst (1937) in a One Parking Solution case where a driver stopped for 12 minutes to take a call on her mobile, and was about the definition of parking but also that grace period's only apply during contract consideration, if you never get out of the car (so not parking) grace periods are irrelevant. It was the copy link button I use, here is another by him using the same case law.  https://youtu.be/prpn9pKE6xk?si=h-oMAQBjESbqV8Ad

patient_dream

TRY THIS`

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prpn9pKE6xk

Whatever2023

Bizare, it was by black belt barrister quoting Ashby V Tolhurst (1937) in a One Parking Solution case where a driver stopped for 12 minutes to take a call on her mobile, and was about the definition of parking but also that grace period's only apply during contract consideration, if you never get out of the car (so not parking) grace periods are irrelevant. It was the copy link button I use, here is another by him using the same case law.  https://youtu.be/prpn9pKE6xk?si=h-oMAQBjESbqV8Ad

You mean the One Parking Solutions judgement (Wilshaw case) that was overturned on appeal…

And note the BB Barrister clearly states in this clip that ‘popping to the shops for two minutes IS parking’…

Coupon-mad

NCC1701-A said:

Jenni_D said:

NCC1701-A said:

Whatever2023 said:

The driver a) exceeded the consideration period and b) wasn’t reviewing/considering the terms of the contract (the purpose of the CP) in any event.

A grace period is added to a paid for / free parking period; therefore, does not apply to this matter.

I fail to see any error on the operators part.

Judges and barristers appear to disagree with your analysis, 

https://youtu.be/L2FXsxpm04E?si=m39_TuRw5Tk4yjLY

Following that link I only see:

Video unavailable

This video is private

🤷‍♀️

Bizare, it was by black belt barrister quoting Ashby V Tolhurst (1937) in a One Parking Solution case where a driver stopped for 12 minutes to take a call on her mobile, and was about the definition of parking but also that grace period's only apply during contract consideration, if you never get out of the car (so not parking) grace periods are irrelevant. It was the copy link button I use, here is another by him using the same case law.  https://youtu.be/prpn9pKE6xk?si=h-oMAQBjESbqV8Ad

He should have done his homework better.

The first hearing (that I won on every point) was not argued that way at all and this is not true "grace period's only apply during contract consideration, if you never get out of the car (so not parking) grace periods are irrelevant"!

I don't argue silly stuff like that.  Plainly wrong.  Anyway never mind the win: OPS v Wilshaw was appealed - lost - the win was overturned.

HHJ Simpkiss fell for every bit of rubbish (including out of date case law) hook, line & sinker.  He had no contract law experience and OPS' barrister's eyes must have lit up.

The Brighton Judges must have been pee'd off because they ignored his judgment since!

Anyway Black Belt barrister is more of a green belt IMHO, when it comes to parking cases.

patient_dream

A BPA NEWS ARTICLE .... written by a comedian no doubt

The BPA are now blaming the media, TV, social media for giving out misleading and false information ???

If the BPA got their act together and trained their money scammer members how to be professionals, we would see less of these TRUE stories in the media

I trust government will not listen to such rubbish

https://www.britishparking-media.co.uk/news/parking-industry-responds

Coupon-mad

I already posted earlier on this thread last week, how only the (perceived to be incredibly stupid) GB News had been daft enough to run with that press release. 

  

Coupon-mad

Can someone please show this full article:



https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/bank-of-scotland-online-savings-transfer-paragon-bank-mistake-help-xxm9nvc03

Coupon-mad

Coupon-mad said:

Looks to me like The Shires Shopping Centre in Trowbridge is likely to see their previous customers boycotting it now they too have been persuaded to think that ANPR is marvellous technology "for the ease & convenience" of shoppers instead of the PCN machine we all know it really is:

https://www.wiltshiretimes.co.uk/news/23324296.trowbridge-shopping-centre-car-park-charges-attract-mixed-reaction/

"Four Your Parking Space advisers were on hand to offer advice and guidance where needed."

Errrm...but obviously not long-term.  There will be no person on foot to assist anyone struggling to pay after their free hour.

Look at the comments.

People are already deciding to shop elsewhere and old people who don't use apps will be ripped off to the tune of £100 per day.

IMHO this was an ill-advised and useless idea by this Shopping Centre.  They'll learn the hard way.

So my prediction a year ago (above) came true:

https://uk.movies.yahoo.com/movies/car-park-claims-another-victim-050100740.html

"A man has been left feeling ‘pinned into a corner’ after receiving a letter telling him to pay a £170 fine or go to court, due to a ‘car park mistake’.

Lewis Edwards from Westbury said he regularly uses The Shires shopping centre car park in Trowbridge and has no memory of ever not paying for parking.

He is not the first to fall victim to payment issues at The Shires car park either.

Older and younger shoppers are all being ripped off by Parkmaven and people are boycotting the Shires Shopping Centre in Trowbridge.

Quelle surprise.

The BPA must be so proud.

ParkingMad

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/bank-of-scotland-online-savings-transfer-paragon-bank-mistake-help-xxm9nvc03

I don’t have a smartphone, so parking firm fined me £170

The Times consumer champion gets to grips with an unfair penalty for someone with multiple sclerosis

Katherine Denham

Wednesday March 27 2024, 12.00pm GMT, The Times

In March last year I caught a train from Manchester Piccadilly and parked in a nearby car park. The pay and display sign gave the option to pay by phone, but when I called the number a recorded message said the option wasn’t available at that site. 

I tried this twice with the same result. This meant that the only option was to pay for parking through an app, but I don’t own a smartphone. I asked a passer-by for directions to another car park near the station, got back in my car and drove off as quickly as I could so I would have enough time to catch my train. My time in the car park amounted to 15 minutes.

I have multiple sclerosis and it takes me much longer than others to move, but UK Car Park Management (CPM) has disputed the fact that it took me that long to leave the car park and has fined me £100. Its cameras can see only the car’s time of entry and exit, and nothing else. I challenged the fine but my appeal was rejected twice.

The penalty charge has increased, and I am now being told to pay £170. I did not park and did not realise that it was a crime to not possess a smartphone.
Name and address supplied

Troubleshooter says

It could easily take someone 15 minutes to find a space, park, try to negotiate how to pay, find information about another car park and drive off, so I thought this penalty was unreasonable. 

The car park has automatic number plate recognition cameras, which capture the time that vehicles enter and leave. These images are checked against payment logs from the app, pay by phone service and permit system to make sure that all vehicles are authorised to park. 

CPM said it gives drivers a grace period, but how long that is depends on the size of the car park, and in its view you had spent too long in this one.

• Is it worth appealing against a parking fine?

When you appealed against the penalty you were asked for proof that you had a blue badge, which CPM said you had not provided. Yet you showed me your letter, which enclosed a copy of your badge and a note from your doctor to say that you were registered as disabled. CPM received this in May after the appeals process was complete, but I was surprised that it had not had a change of heart once it got your letter.

After my intervention CPM has decided to waive the £170 charge. It has been a year-long battle, and you were relieved that this sorry saga was finally at an end, but you are angry that you feel it is now mandatory to have a smartphone.

Coupon-mad

Thanks @ParkingMad

I hope in future, PPCs get an overdue shock from a real ADR that applies the Equality Act.