Parking stories in the News/media

Coupon-mad

Forecourt Eye are called a legitimate company in this article:

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/experts/article-15149803/Im-unfairly-accused-driving-without-paying-40-petrol-SALLY-SORTS-IT.html?ico=mol_mobile_home-newtab&molReferrerUrl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailymail.co.uk%2Fhome%2Findex.html&_gl=1*1uw6fnf*_gcl_au*NzU2NzY4Nzc1LjE3NTU1MTExMjg.*_ga*MTExOTk5OTM4MC4xNjI1MzUzMjQ1*_ga_C9F47K6NW6*czE3NTkyNzUwMjckbzE1MDMkZzEkdDE3NTkyNzUzODYkajQ5JGwwJGgxODY4MTA4Mjk3

Wrongly pursued an elderly lady who HAD paid for petrol. They got sussed & pretended it's a one off but we know it isn't.

Coupon-mad

This one is about Smart Parking and APCOA

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cpw1nv9nvg9o.amp

'Parking fines ruined my 80th birthday'

Smart Parking Ltd said they had "considered [the] appeal in detail [and] decided to uphold the Parking Charge".

On 24 July, he appealed to the Independent Appeals Service (IAS) but the appeal was dismissed. Mr Williamson said it was confusing because "any single car park should just have one car park operator".

"It's been upsetting," he added. "It was my mum's 80th birthday party, but now all she's thinking about is this fine."

But this is the funniest bit, bearing in mind the IAS rejected the appeal (course they did) but they tell the BBC this pile of steaming crap:

IAS said it was aware of the family's concerns and had passed them to the International Parking Community compliance team for further investigation.

"We fully recognise the importance of motorists being able to clearly understand who manages a car park and the conditions of parking," it added.

"Issues relating to unclear or inadequate signage are taken seriously, and where such concerns arise, the IAS refers them to the IPC for compliance review."

  

"Where such concerns arise"?!

  

"IAS passed it to the IPC"

  

Teehee...Will Hurley passed it to Will Hurley

  

But they'd TURNED DOWN THE FLIPPING APPEAL OUT OF HAND, AS THEY DO 95% OF THE TIME, so the truth is their so-called assessor had no such concerns!

You could not make it up. I don't think they'd know the truth if their future depended on it.

Umkomaas

Coupon-mad said:

Forecourt Eye are called a legitimate company in this article:

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/experts/article-15149803/Im-unfairly-accused-driving-without-paying-40-petrol-SALLY-SORTS-IT.html?ico=mol_mobile_home-newtab&molReferrerUrl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailymail.co.uk%2Fhome%2Findex.html&_gl=1*1uw6fnf*_gcl_au*NzU2NzY4Nzc1LjE3NTU1MTExMjg.*_ga*MTExOTk5OTM4MC4xNjI1MzUzMjQ1*_ga_C9F47K6NW6*czE3NTkyNzUwMjckbzE1MDMkZzEkdDE3NTkyNzUzODYkajQ5JGwwJGgxODY4MTA4Mjk3

Wrongly pursued an elderly lady who HAD paid for petrol. They got sussed & pretended it's a one off but we know it isn't.

I'd still like to know how Forecourt Eye is accessing DVLA data. Is it via their UKCPS KADOE access?

MothballsWallet

Coupon-mad said:

This one is about Smart Parking and APCOA

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cpw1nv9nvg9o.amp

'Parking fines ruined my 80th birthday'

Smart Parking Ltd said they had "considered [the] appeal in detail [and] decided to uphold the Parking Charge".

On 24 July, he appealed to the Independent Appeals Service (IAS) but the appeal was dismissed. Mr Williamson said it was confusing because "any single car park should just have one car park operator".

"It's been upsetting," he added. "It was my mum's 80th birthday party, but now all she's thinking about is this fine."

But this is the funniest bit, bearing in mind the IAS rejected the appeal (course they did) but they tell the BBC this pile of steaming crap:

IAS said it was aware of the family's concerns and had passed them to the International Parking Community compliance team for further investigation.

"We fully recognise the importance of motorists being able to clearly understand who manages a car park and the conditions of parking," it added.

"Issues relating to unclear or inadequate signage are taken seriously, and where such concerns arise, the IAS refers them to the IPC for compliance review."

  

"Where such concerns arise"?!

  

"IAS passed it to the IPC"

  

Teehee...Will Hurley passed it to Will Hurley

  

But they'd TURNED DOWN THE FLIPPING APPEAL OUT OF HAND, AS THEY DO 95% OF THE TIME, so the truth is their so-called assessor had no such concerns!

You could not make it up. I don't think they'd know the truth if their future depended on it.

Highlighting is mine - do you think Will Hurley passed it from his left hand to his right hand behind his own back?

patient_dream

MothballsWallet said:

Coupon-mad said:

This one is about Smart Parking and APCOA

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cpw1nv9nvg9o.amp

'Parking fines ruined my 80th birthday'

Smart Parking Ltd said they had "considered [the] appeal in detail [and] decided to uphold the Parking Charge".

On 24 July, he appealed to the Independent Appeals Service (IAS) but the appeal was dismissed. Mr Williamson said it was confusing because "any single car park should just have one car park operator".

"It's been upsetting," he added. "It was my mum's 80th birthday party, but now all she's thinking about is this fine."

But this is the funniest bit, bearing in mind the IAS rejected the appeal (course they did) but they tell the BBC this pile of steaming crap:

IAS said it was aware of the family's concerns and had passed them to the International Parking Community compliance team for further investigation.

"We fully recognise the importance of motorists being able to clearly understand who manages a car park and the conditions of parking," it added.

"Issues relating to unclear or inadequate signage are taken seriously, and where such concerns arise, the IAS refers them to the IPC for compliance review."

  

"Where such concerns arise"?!

  

"IAS passed it to the IPC"

  

Teehee...Will Hurley passed it to Will Hurley

  

But they'd TURNED DOWN THE FLIPPING APPEAL OUT OF HAND, AS THEY DO 95% OF THE TIME, so the truth is their so-called assessor had no such concerns!

You could not make it up. I don't think they'd know the truth if their future depended on it.

Highlighting is mine - do you think Will Hurley passed it from his left hand to his right hand behind his own back?

That sums up the IPC/IAS .... a complete SHAM that government should shut down ..... no wonder SMART moved to the IPC so they could get the PERKS of the IAS

Car1980

https://www.thestar.co.uk/business/consumer/excel-parking-sheffield-firm-loses-court-battle-over-ps430-demand-for-inputting-error-5338857?fbclid=IwdGRleANLt2VleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHiXNjRmT1_TVoD1CDpgK63_2OB4WNurDPjeT4SDFOVZfa_gAzkPd4BDXpKyj_aem_IrIy_uYryaDjDO0e-1RsXA

Excel get spanked again, £99 costs awarded against. Try to prove machine isn't faulty by producing just 2 hours' worth of transactions. 

Coupon-mad

Is this private parking ticket company the most unpopular business in Milton Keynes?

https://www.miltonkeynes.co.uk/news/people/is-this-private-parking-ticket-company-the-most-unpopular-business-in-milton-keynes-5343471

Take a bow, Napier Parking, who reportedly issue over 100,000 PCNs per year.

The IPC must be so proud.

Napier said:

"In respect of appeals being allowed, the truth is we overturn very few on appeal, the reason being that they are issued correctly in the first place so there are no grounds to cancel them. In 2024 we had 584 appeal go to the Independent Appeals Service, which is the second appeal stage.

This is a tiny number given we will probably issue around 115,000 Parking Charges this coming year. Again a very small number given the enormous volume of vehicles we park across the country.”

Four of the appeals were found in favour of the motorist, another 11 were conceded by Napier, and 569 were declined and found in favour of Napier.

“From these statistics you can tell that we take the operation of our car parks extremely seriously and ensure that we pursue correctly issued PCN's,” said the spokesperson."

----------------------------

Well there are lies, damned lies and then there are statistics.

JUST FOUR APPEALS 'ALLOWED' BY THE IAS OUT OF 584!

FOUR!!! 

The above stat can also be interpreted to show how broken and plainly non-impartial the farce of industry 'appeals services' are.

Coupon-mad

Driver given parking fine after five-minutes at car park

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/driver-given-parking-fine-five-040000836.html

After arriving at the newly reopened underground car park, Deborah attempted to pay for their stay, however, found that the pay machine was 'out of order' and a completed online payment form was 'failing to submit'.

According to Deborah, there was also signage present in the car park that warned drivers about 'patchy' network coverage.

This signage has since been removed.

With no members of staff present in the car park, Deborah and her husband decided to leave to find alternative parking - around five minutes and 30 seconds after entering the Blackfriars Street Car Park.

"We went back in on Monday, September 22 and I wanted to take picture of the signage so we had proof of what it said only to find that all of it had been changed. I don't believe that we are the only people that have had a fine in this circumstance."

Deborah is now in the process of appealing...

I Park Smart Ltd. have been contacted by the News & Star for comment.

Coupon-mad

https://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/25505600.woman-handed-court-summons-parking-earlham-hotel/

"Jessie Powell stopped for just 20 minutes after her Apple Watch alerted her to low blood sugar levels. Despite staying in the car park run by Euro Parking Services Ltd just long enough to eat a bag of sweets to bring her blood sugar levels up, she was handed a £60 fine."

Of course it wasn't a fine but she seems to have got herself a CCJ, to boot:

"She added this has been "very upsetting" for her. Miss Powell is angry at being handed the County Court Judgement as she claims she sent the money to the parking company, but the payment was not taken from her bank.

If she chooses to take the appeal to court, she would potentially be liable for the £313 court fee on top of the near £300 charge."

So says the clueless paper but the point is that she appealed and it was rejected. Breach of the Equality Act 2010. I'd sue the hotel.

patient_dream

MORE HORROR STORIES ??

I hope for once this government gets it right