Parking stories in the News/media

Bongo10

Meanwhile the NHS doesn't seem to have learnt about ANPR problems:
Royal Surrey County Hospital changes parking payment system - BBC News
I think I saw something similar for Teesside Hospital the other day.

As my wife has to attend fairly often, I am tempted to point out to the CEO that requiring a blue badge holder to register is discriminatory.  Does someone have a suitable form of words?
At the moment all the disabled spaces are separate from the main car park and not subject to any charges, although finding a free one can be a problem!

Fruitcake

Bongo10 said:

Meanwhile the NHS doesn't seem to have learnt about ANPR problems:
Royal Surrey County Hospital changes parking payment system - BBC News
I think I saw something similar for Teesside Hospital the other day.

As my wife has to attend fairly often, I am tempted to point out to the CEO that requiring a blue badge holder to register is discriminatory.  Does someone have a suitable form of words?
At the moment all the disabled spaces are separate from the main car park and not subject to any charges, although finding a free one can be a problem!

Requiring a person with a disability and who has protected characteristics to do something that a person without such a disability is discrimination and a criminal offence as it breaches the requirements of the Equality Act 2010.

You would need to read the relevant parts of the Act with regards to indirect discrimination and/or direct discrimination.

Failing to anticipate the needs of a disabled person with protected characteristics would constitute indirect discrimination. Requiring someone with a known disability having protected characteristics to do something an able bodied person is not required to do would be direct discrimination.
Both would be criminal offences.

What worries me is that the last iteration of the parking code of practice required disabled motorists to display a blue badge on private land in order to use an acessible parking bay, even though the BB scheme does not apply on private land.
This means potentially that a new mandatory CoP could be at variance with the EA 2010 by preventing disabled persons without a BB from being granted reasonable adjustments such as access to wider parking bays/bays nearer a facility, or penalising said persons by issuing then with a parking charge notice for not having a BB.

In other words, the government is in danger of introducing a CoP that fails to recognise that not all disabilities are visible, and an absence of a BB is not an absence of disability.

Jenni_D

As C-m is involved with the steering group (or whatever it is called), I'm pretty sure she'll have raised this already - or will at the relevant time.  

Fruitcake

Jenni_D said:

As C-m is involved with the steering group (or whatever it is called), I'm pretty sure she'll have raised this already - or will at the relevant time.  

I raised it during the government consultation and during an online Q & A with one of the government agencies, but they just kicked the can down the road.

Raising it and getting the powers to understand it and making sure we don't have two diametrically opposite legislations are two different things.

Coupon-mad

I'm not sure the 2022 code does say that a Blue Badge is required?  I remember being fairly content with the wording which was mentioned a blue badge but also talked about people with disabilities.

Which clause is the worst?  Let me know and I'll try to get it amended if that opportunity arises.  I don't even yet know if the 2022 Code will be the base for this Government's code and/or how much they might want to change it, but I will find out more soon.

Nellymoser

Shock as family get £100 PCN while helping disabled grandmother exit car in Teesside Park

The family said all the car park's disabled spaces had been filled, leaving them with little choice but to park at the end of a normal row, where there was extra space for her walking aid on one side. Despite reportedly not inconveniencing any other vehicles, and only parking over a white line to enable Maureen to safely get out of the car, they received a £100 PCN in the post shortly afterwards.

Parking operator Minster Baywatch initially rejected their appeal - later climbed down and cancelled the PCN after accusations of "heartlessness".

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/news/uk/2040192/family-distraught-fined-disabled-grandmother-car/amp

Fruitcake

Coupon-mad said:

I'm not sure the 2022 code does say that a Blue Badge is required?  I remember being fairly content with the wording which was mentioned a blue badge but also talked about people with disabilities.

Which clause is the worst?  Let me know and I'll try to get it amended if that opportunity arises.  I don't even yet know if the 2022 Code will be the base for this Government's code and/or how much they might want to change it, but I will find out more soon.

I'm working from memory, but I'm sure the consultation document mentioned that a PCN would be issued for not displaying a BB in an accessible bay. 
I challenged this and a PPC operative responded with a comment that they had no other way to tell if a motorist had a disability. I responded that they'd had over ten years since the EA was introduced to come up with some alternatives to only a BB.

Switcher_Sam

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce8g13pp0plo

Amongst other things..:

"..But the IPC told the BBC that the Code of Practice's rules on signage were not retrospective and would not be enforced until the end of 2026.."

Car1980

"Derek Millard-Smith, a specialist lawyer in the UK parking sector"

A specialist lawyer FOR the UK parking sector by the sounds of it.

Coupon-mad

Switcher_Sam said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce8g13pp0plo

Amongst other things..:

"..But the IPC told the BBC that the Code of Practice's rules on signage were not retrospective and would not be enforced until the end of 2026.."

Classy.

This is predatory, covert filming and an immediate charge: exactly like clamping used to be. But the IPC haven't commented on that, have they?

Guess what, IPC:

It doesn't matter that your useless nonsense 'Code' has given your paying ex-clampers two years worth of rope to comply with your joke clauses, if what UKPS are doing is an unfair and misleading commercial practice.

That's illegal under the CPUTRs /the new DMCC Act and in addition, covert surveillance is a breach of the DPA 2018 ..but nobody stops them.

Look at the supposed signs!

"Martin Leighton, from Beeston, said he received a charge in March for unknowingly entering the land for 70 seconds to drop-off his sister and perform a U-turn.

He told the BBC he would have turned around on the road but there were other vehicles behind him wanting to get past.

Now the 41-year-old is flagging down cars and posting videos on social media to stop as many drivers from entering the land as possible. "It's just too much money to give away nowadays, it's not fair," he said.

"If it was £25 that's punishment enough, but £60 or £100, no-one's got that sort of money."

"If I had been parked up, if I left my vehicle and completely ignored the legislation, I can understand them being angry and invoicing me. But if it's someone just turning around then I don't think that warrants a £100 fine."

Quite right.

The IPC must be so proud.

They 'audit' every site, so they say. Remotely of course, just looking at some close up sign images. Complete joke. Well - like so many traps run by IPC firms - this one is yet another scam site. 

But both victims paid...why do people pay? Clearly this is a scam operation that would never ever get past a judge. There's no contract formed if you can't see it.

You can't even put a wheel on private land nor turn your car round these days without some sad greasy PPC oik who can't get a proper job, looking at you secretly from a CCTV camera and getting off on the thought of loadsamoney.

There has to be massive signage and alerts that you are consenting to surveillance (or why not run it fairly and properly, on foot with a barrier and signs).

I don't even think the 2022 Code got it right as they didn't even set any rules about text size. Nor did that Code tackle the scourge of surveillance cameras hidden on private land with no Privacy Impact Assessment done first.

That camera is filming every car and pedestrian across that road AND the windows of all those houses opposite. This covert camera surveillance has got to stop.