Parking stories in the News/media

Thorndorise

Over on LinkedIn again, food 'ol Will with the amazing (unreferenced facts)!

OR Will, the repeat 'offenders' could be caught by your companies malpractice and lack of regulation allowing them to get away with it. And where the heck does 35% come from, evidence is key - share the knowledge!

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/will-hurley-45077141_repeat-offenders-and-evaders-are-a-significant-activity-7411345778499018752-oy_p?

Of the parking charges that are issued.

Over 35% are issued to repeat offenders.
That is not fairness.
That is the same people repeatedly breaking the rules.

Either because the deterrent is insufficient for them.
Or because they have a ghost plate.
Or they hope they will get away with it.
Or they have gotten away with it before.

Coupon-mad

Thorndorise said:

Over on LinkedIn again, food 'ol Will with the amazing (unreferenced facts)!

OR Will, the repeat 'offenders' could be caught by your companies malpractice and lack of regulation allowing them to get away with it. And where the heck does 35% come from, evidence is key - share the knowledge!

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/will-hurley-45077141_repeat-offenders-and-evaders-are-a-significant-activity-7411345778499018752-oy_p?

Of the parking charges that are issued.

Over 35% are issued to repeat offenders.
That is not fairness.
That is the same people repeatedly breaking the rules.

Either because the deterrent is insufficient for them.
Or because they have a ghost plate.
Or they hope they will get away with it.
Or they have gotten away with it before.

...Or because Will's rogue industry choose to:

- let greedy ticketers at residential sites lurk and secretly process photos via the PPC's back office for a week or more;

- then the PPC uses what the know is likely to be an old address (because these victims are usually unsuspecting new tenants) and send ten, twelve or more secretly accumulated PCNs into a black hole;

- such that the victim only finds out months later when they get a 4 figure threatogram;

- Like in VCS v Carr, where he was fighting c£9000 (...over FIFTY unfair PCNs) for the heinous crime of parking at his new home and trying to wrench a permit from VCS who instead preferred to sue him. Luckily the Court of Appeal stopped their little game, for Mr Carr at least.


Remedy to end this unfairness:

At residential sites, tickets must be on windscreens only. No secret ticketing. No getting DVLA data (known likely wrong) of people who have just moved. This is cost neutral to the industry because there is already a ticketer on foot, taking photos.

P.S.
how the heck did he manage to shoe-horn the phrase of the moment, 'ghost plates' into his post? Completely irrelevant to this subject. 

Nellymoser

Wonder if Will has percentages for his industry's parking operators, debt collectors and legals who are repeat 'offenders' at 'breaking the rules'

kryten3000

Nellymoser said:

Wonder if Will has percentages for his industry's parking operators, debt collectors and legals who are repeat 'offenders' at 'breaking the rules'

It's likely similar to the IAS figure of around 96%

Nellymoser

Southampton council has insisted a decision has not been made over the management of a city centre car park despite Horizon signs appearing on site before the consultation is closed.

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/parking-signs-charges-appear-car-033000860.html

Coupon-mad

But spaces provided by or owned by Councils can't legally be monitored by ANPR to issue charges.