Parking stories in the News/media

patient_dream

Just been looking at the BPA NEWS site.  It's full of PARK MARK AWARDS, what a waste of the time

The BPA should be sorting out their money scammers and rogue traders as a priority not this rubbish

Nellymoser

That's where BPA skills lie...giving out Park Mark Adwards. It's got them a few 5 star reviews recently on Trustpilot  🙄

patient_dream

Nellymoser said:

That's where BPA skills lie...giving out Park Mark Adwards. It's got them a few 5 star reviews recently on Trustpilot  🙄

No doubt, not forgetting their skill in collecting money from Rogue Traders

Switcher_Sam

Coupon-mad said:

Colonnades management cuts customers’ free parking by half

https://insidecroydon.com/2025/11/26/colonnades-management-cuts-customers-free-parking-by-half/amp/

"Shoppers and gym members visiting the Colonnades centre off the Purley Way got a nasty shock this week when they discovered that the free parking period had been reduced by half, from three hours to just 90 minutes."

Anyway we already have a post from @Switcher_Sam showing that this is UKPA (wonder if he/she can go get pics of the new signs for this thread, including whether there are extra signs at the entrance to warn about the change):

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81518612/#Comment_81518612

I read a post elsewhere that it was apparently 4 hours free parking a few years ago, then reduced to 3 hours and now... 90 minutes?!

Whaaat? Just look at the number and type of leisure firms & retailers here:

"Colonnades includes a Premier Inn motel, KFC and McDonald’s takeaways, a Nando’s and Costa coffee, as well as the Oxygen trampoline park and Kidspace amusements, a Wickes DIY centre and Nuffield Health gym."

Sources who have contacted Inside Croydon maintain that the businesses based at the Colonnades were not consulted over the changes to the free parking timings, something that a manager at 9Yards today denied when approached for comment.

One source said:

“As the average play party at Oxygen or Playspace is two hours, this will really affect trade.”

Another Colonnades source said:

“Lots of people will be caught out by this and get a fine.” They said that after their first visit yesterday with the new, shorter free parking period, “It would be so easy to miss the sign if you regularly park there, as you might not be taking any notice.”

A third source said:

“This has happened without any warning to the tenants of the retail units on site, many of whose customers will be immediately impacted. A lot of people attending Kidspace, Oxygen and Nuffield Gym, by the very nature of the business, stay for more than 90 minutes.”

Take a bow, UKPA.

ANPR in the hands of private parking firms is ruining retail and crushing high street recovery. You can't get a better example.

The BPA must be so proud.

((Sorry for delay. I'm not local to Croydon any more, but do still go there fairly often. Was back today, but not in daylight unfortunately))

All signage now states 90 minutes. I couldn't find any 'forgotten' 3-hour signs and all signs appeared to have been completely replaced (or maybe fully-vinyled), but not simply over-stickered.

No warning about changed terms whatsoever..

(And I noticed a few bays I didn't notice last time. Painted blue with '60 min' on the road (obviously hidden if you actually park in one). No signage to explain what these are intended for, there were simply the new  90-minute signs adjacent)

Coupon-mad

That's in breach of the BPA Code of Practice then: no extra signs warning of a change.

Car1980

Snakes_Belly said:

I don't know if this has been posted already on this Forum. It may have been. This post is taken from a FB forum that relates to two specific car parks. The OP has said that it can be posted on other related forums. It relates to a case that was discontinued at the last minute. 

"Further to my earlier posts you may recall that ECPL discontinued the County Court proceedings just prior to the trial date. We asked them to pay some costs but they flatly refused. We thought that their behaviour throughout had been unreasonable and so made an application to the Court relying on CPR 27.14.(2)(g). The hearing was yesterday and I am pleased to say that the Judge found that ECPL had committed unreasonable litigation conduct. Costs were awarded against them in the sum of £653 to be paid within 21 days. The whole saga extended to a three year period. Will this case change their attitude? Do you know what I do not think so!"

Yes, if everyone did that then DCB Legal's whole scam would fall apart.

But "I'm just glad it's all over" is the default response to the inevitable discontinuance.

Nellymoser

CEL the untouchable parking firm invoices an Ipswich pensioner £700 for using her own drive

https://www.ipswich.co.uk/articles/civic-enforecement-fining-an-ipswich-pensioner-for-using-her-own-drive

Since August, Denise has accumulated seven pcns totalling £700 – not for illegal parking, but for the simple act of leaving her home. 

The camera, installed by retirement housing operator Kingsdale at Christchurch Court on Cobbold Mews, was meant to monitor the retirement housing car park. Instead, it has been capturing private parking spaces belonging to residents of neighbouring properties.

When Denise tried to challenge the fines, she discovered that Civil Enforcement had made itself virtually unreachable. There is no phone number to call, no email address to write to, and no physical office to visit. The only point of contact is a payment portal.

Civil Enforcement's business model appears to rely on making it as difficult as possible for people to challenge their fines. It has a 1.1-star rating on Google, based on more than 1,200 reviews from people who – like Denise – feel they have been unfairly treated and exploited. Words repeatedly used to describe them include "predatory", "exploitive", "thieves", "nightmare" and "horrendous".

Back in May Denise reached out to Kingsdale, the company managing Christchurch Court. The manager told Denise that she had spoken to the owners about the cameras and car park, and that "it is being looked into." Months later, nothing had changed, more pcns dropped through the letterbox.

Until Ipswich.co.uk contacted Kingsdale in November. 

A spokesperson confirmed they had been approached by Denise and that they were investigating. But in six months the company had taken no meaningful action to resolve the issue – until this week, when it appears that one camera was quietly removed.

One camera may have been removed, but the fines remain, and so does the fundamental problem. Private parking enforcement companies operate with minimal oversight, making themselves unreachable whilst threatening legal action against people who have done nothing wrong.

For Denise, the nightmare is not over as Civil Enforcement continues to threaten action.

Appalling story highlighting once again that citizens have to turn to the media for help.

1505grandad

" Private parking enforcement companies operate with minimal oversight, making themselves unreachable whilst threatening legal action against people who have done nothing wrong."

All of course condoned by the "we've got the motorists back" DVLA under the KADOE "reasonable cause" scam.

Half_way

Nellymoser said:

CEL the untouchable parking firm invoices an Ipswich pensioner £700 for using her own drive

https://www.ipswich.co.uk/articles/civic-enforecement-fining-an-ipswich-pensioner-for-using-her-own-drive

Since August, Denise has accumulated seven pcns totalling £700 – not for illegal parking, but for the simple act of leaving her home. 

The camera, installed by retirement housing operator Kingsdale at Christchurch Court on Cobbold Mews, was meant to monitor the retirement housing car park. Instead, it has been capturing private parking spaces belonging to residents of neighbouring properties.

When Denise tried to challenge the fines, she discovered that Civil Enforcement had made itself virtually unreachable. There is no phone number to call, no email address to write to, and no physical office to visit. The only point of contact is a payment portal.

Civil Enforcement's business model appears to rely on making it as difficult as possible for people to challenge their fines. It has a 1.1-star rating on Google, based on more than 1,200 reviews from people who – like Denise – feel they have been unfairly treated and exploited. Words repeatedly used to describe them include "predatory", "exploitive", "thieves", "nightmare" and "horrendous".

Back in May Denise reached out to Kingsdale, the company managing Christchurch Court. The manager told Denise that she had spoken to the owners about the cameras and car park, and that "it is being looked into." Months later, nothing had changed, more pcns dropped through the letterbox.

Until Ipswich.co.uk contacted Kingsdale in November. 

A spokesperson confirmed they had been approached by Denise and that they were investigating. But in six months the company had taken no meaningful action to resolve the issue – until this week, when it appears that one camera was quietly removed.

One camera may have been removed, but the fines remain, and so does the fundamental problem. Private parking enforcement companies operate with minimal oversight, making themselves unreachable whilst threatening legal action against people who have done nothing wrong.

For Denise, the nightmare is not over as Civil Enforcement continues to threaten action.

Appalling story highlighting once again that citizens have to turn to the media for help.

simple, take legal action against the management company, time wasted and UKGDPR breach.
Those that enable PPCs need to be hurt (legally /financially) and until that starts happening the whole thing will just continue as is.

MothballsWallet

Nellymoser said:

CEL the untouchable parking firm invoices an Ipswich pensioner £700 for using her own drive

https://www.ipswich.co.uk/articles/civic-enforecement-fining-an-ipswich-pensioner-for-using-her-own-drive

Since August, Denise has accumulated seven pcns totalling £700 – not for illegal parking, but for the simple act of leaving her home. 

The camera, installed by retirement housing operator Kingsdale at Christchurch Court on Cobbold Mews, was meant to monitor the retirement housing car park. Instead, it has been capturing private parking spaces belonging to residents of neighbouring properties.

When Denise tried to challenge the fines, she discovered that Civil Enforcement had made itself virtually unreachable. There is no phone number to call, no email address to write to, and no physical office to visit. The only point of contact is a payment portal.

Civil Enforcement's business model appears to rely on making it as difficult as possible for people to challenge their fines. It has a 1.1-star rating on Google, based on more than 1,200 reviews from people who – like Denise – feel they have been unfairly treated and exploited. Words repeatedly used to describe them include "predatory", "exploitive", "thieves", "nightmare" and "horrendous".

Back in May Denise reached out to Kingsdale, the company managing Christchurch Court. The manager told Denise that she had spoken to the owners about the cameras and car park, and that "it is being looked into." Months later, nothing had changed, more pcns dropped through the letterbox.

Until Ipswich.co.uk contacted Kingsdale in November. 

A spokesperson confirmed they had been approached by Denise and that they were investigating. But in six months the company had taken no meaningful action to resolve the issue – until this week, when it appears that one camera was quietly removed.

One camera may have been removed, but the fines remain, and so does the fundamental problem. Private parking enforcement companies operate with minimal oversight, making themselves unreachable whilst threatening legal action against people who have done nothing wrong.

For Denise, the nightmare is not over as Civil Enforcement continues to threaten action.

Appalling story highlighting once again that citizens have to turn to the media for help.

Isn't it a breach of the Companies Act (2006) for a company to not be contactable, i.e, publishing contact details?