We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Parking stories in the News/media
Comments
-
They’ve been at it for years!
Why has this industry been allowed to get away with it for years ??3 -
"They’ve been at it for years!"
Presumably breaching the KADOE contract:-
"A6. Compliance with the Law and Industry Best Practice
A6.1. The Customer shall at all times comply with Law and Industry Best Practice in carrying out its obligations under the Contract."
Not that the DVLA give a toss.3 -
Any member of the public would be refused retro planning permission. As we often see people are being told to tear down buildings such as a summer house etc.Nellymoser said:They’ve been at it for years!
Why has this industry been allowed to get away with it for years ??
I fail to see how a council could back date planning permission UNLESS someone is given a presnt
Where are the BPA, don't they ask about planning permission for the signs and why are the DVLA giving out personal data when all those parking tickets issued were not legal ?
ParkingEye should refund everyone who paid during this illegal operation
A full investigation is required for both ParkingEye and the council, plus the BPA and the DVLA2 -
Retrospective permission is based on the premise of 'if they had applied before the development was carried out would it have been given?'. It is not designed to punish.
2 -
I didn't think retrospective permission was granted based on that premise. My understanding is retrospective applications are assessed and judged exactly like any new planning/advertising applications.
Private parking companies know fine well planning/advertising permission is required for their business. They repeatedly don't apply to avoid paying the cost of the application. Their selfish greedy action deprives cash-strapped councils of planning fees revenue.And the MHCLG believes this industry plays an important role in supporting our local economies and high streets 🙄5 -
And the MHCLG believes this industry plays an important role in supporting our local economies and high streets
Such rubbish, I guess they got that from the BPA propaganda comic
0
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.8K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.8K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.7K Spending & Discounts
- 245.9K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.7K Life & Family
- 259.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards