Parking stories in the News/media

Nellymoser · 15 March at 11:21PM

Inverness’s controversial car park’s charging changes - but will Britannia Parking’s move end motorist misery at the Rose Street Retail Park or add to complaints?

https://www.inverness-courier.co.uk/news/controversial-car-park-s-charging-changes-but-will-they-en-429339/

https://www.johnogroat-journal.co.uk/news/debt-collectors-working-for-britannia-parking-demand-170-fr-372953/

Coupon-mad · 15 March at 11:52PM

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81924247#Comment_81924247

Terrible that people are being scared unto paying twice the sum that the Supreme Court said had to cover all the 'enforcement' (automated letter chain) costs of an ANPR PCN-churning firm.

One of several frightened and intimidated victims said:

“When I went to pay for the ticket the screen stated that it was out of order so I don’t know after that how you were supposed to pay and we just carried on with the shopping.
“I think we must have been parked there for 10 maybe 15 minutes at the most and then we were back on the road – this was back on October 23 last year so I thought nothing more of it. Then on January 15 but dated January 3 I got a letter from Direct Collection Bailiffs Ltd (DCBL) demanding payment for non-payment of parking fines costing £170 stating we only had two weeks to pay.
“The problem was we did not get any parking fine at all and by the time we got the letter from DCBL I was told when I phoned them that it was already too late to arrange a repayment schedule.
But because I am a pensioner they said I could pay £85 this month and £85 next month.
They also told me that Britannia Parking had sent the parking tickets to my old address. I couldn’t understand how the debt collectors could get the right address but Britannia could not – to me it seems like the whole thing is a big rip-off, it is simply not fair.”
Local councillors in the Inverness Central ward where the car park is located said the treatment of the public is not acceptable, including Michael Cameron who said:
“The way these companies pursue people for the most trivial technical violations of conditions does make me suspect that their business model relies upon this income."

Errr yes.

The protection racket landowner-duping "we can run your car park free, guv" approach is the main underlying problem with the sector.

It should be illegal to run car parks where a main part of the income is from catching people out.

No Government has tackled it.

Making a pensioner think he has to shell out £85 for two months running is a rip-off scam.

The BPA must be so proud.

cooldude255220 · 16 March at 9:16AM

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81923995#Comment_81923995

Thanks, but that to me suggests that the restriction is on when Notices can be served by post rather than the use of cameras per se.

Jenni_D · 16 March at 12:48PM

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81924422#Comment_81924422

But the two are intrinsically linked, are they not? In off-street car parks (owned by the council) they're not allowed to issue PCNs via post (unless it's a follow-up from a windscreen PCN). Ergo they're not allowed to use ANPR/CCTV to issue PCNs in such circumstances - it must be issued via a parking warden, as a windscreen PCN.

That's how I see it. 🤷‍♀️

cooldude255220 · 16 March at 1:14PM

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81924698#Comment_81924698

I think we're almost in agreement. There's nothing prohibiting the council from using ANPR in car parks (i.e., like I said above, to flag naughty vehicles), provided that the warden gets out the car and sticks the sticker on the windscreen, instead of the ANPR system posting it out.