Parking stories in the News/media

MothballsWallet

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81952125#Comment_81952125

Then those journos have failed their ethics requirements.

Your PPC friends could face The Hague Courts for crimes against humanity level charges - do you want to guess what the penalty there would be?

Bazarius

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81952251#Comment_81952251

we currently have a case where the non PoFA PCN clearly states they will pursue outstanding charges from the driver (not keeper). The keeper provided proof of airline tickets etc to show that the keeper was out of the country .

Guess what - UKCPM have said that the keeper is liable unless they properly discharge liability by providing the driver’s details .

Why are they lying about it ? It could be viewed as fraudulent. They never learned their lessons from their exposure in BBC X-ray . IPC just gave them a soft slap on the wrist .

Looking forward to taking this one to court .

Coupon-mad

The rogue parking sector are like a cracked record, pretending that everything they do is purely down to the landowners' wishes.

I call BS.

We know the tail wags the dog, with the PPC calling the shots with:

• deliberately tight free shopping time limits, sold to duped retailers as 'necessary' to increase footfall (utter codswallop, it's to increase PCN issuance to more slower, disabled & elderly customers who are least likely to make any noise);
• clients' dashboards with a very restricted (then once the kit is in, further reduced) exempt VRM whitelist, sold to duped businesses as doing them a favour (utter codswallop, it's to increase PCNs to staff & authorised visitors because the PPC deliberately makes too few virtual permits available);
• in VCS' case - and with most IPC firms - the PCN sum is always £100, not lower or proportionate to alleged breaches: sold to duped landowners including Airports as necessary because a deterrent has to be high (utter codswallop, it's to maximise profits and takes no account of the fact that in a 'credible deterrent' model, studies have proved it is never all about the 'penalty' and proper red routes on street outside of London operate at £70 penalty level … and that works very well).
• false - we believe, made up - customer complaints sent to pubs & small retailers, always using the same words and purportedly from "a customer who couldn't find a space to park and saw people leaving cars & walking off-site" in the lead up to an ANPR firm pitching for the site. Then as if by magic, the PPC rocks up with their sales spiel astonishingly coincidentally mirroring (and promising to solve the problem of) the imaginary complaints that were placed in the mind of the pub or shop managers … who are totally duped.

etc., etc.

A rape & pillage approach, an industry insider revealed:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2016/12/parkingeye-employee-reveals-their-rape.html?m=1:

Look at all the pubs & small shops forced to close as a result, or whole shopping areas struggling with massive loss of custom, caused by the ANPR firm.

e.g. recent articles this year re Napier at Billingshurst (frightening people away and reportedly ripping off disabled drivers) and OPS at Wick Parade, Littlehampton (separating the parade and fining people who use the pharmacy or post office).

Shedloads of examples in this very thread including a Doctor whose Yarm GP surgery was taken in by CEL then had to go public with a social media grovelling apology to scared & intimidated patients and had to get legal help to remove the parasite.

And look at how ParkingEye took Somerfield and their customers to the cleaners and carried on marauding across the UK with their ever-expanding ANPR monster regime, despite the fact that the judge held that the PPC were guilty of the tort of deceit.

Never mind all the evidence, eh?

patient_dream

Well said kryten3000

Like most of us, we just laugh at the parking companies who add stupid comments to this forum

All part of the BPA/IPC parking scam to extort money

Car1980

If the landowner's wishes were clearly communicated then they would be happy and the parking company would be unhappy.

We all know the balancing act - you need enough drivers to break the rules to make money and for the landowner to feel like they need a parking company because people just won't stop rule breaking. And a kickback certainly helps grease the wheels.

Tony Soprano would be proud.

Kaizen2024

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81952366#Comment_81952366

think you’ve gone a bit off topic there..

Nellymoser

https://www.change.org/p/been-caught-out-parking-after-8pm-at-west-quay-retail-park-cancel-fines-make-it-fairer?source_location=search

Daily Echo Coverage of Unfair Parking Fines - WOULD YOU LIKE YOUR STORY HEARD?

Cllr Jeremy Moulton provides his 5th update on 1 April on his petition page

As I have previously explained, Southampton City Council Trading Standards agree that the parking signage is confusing. Trading Standards are next meeting with Britannia Parking on 17 April, and I will be seeking a further update immediately afterwards. My strong view remains that if it is accepted that the signage is confusing, then people will have been unfairly fined, and those fines should be reconsidered.

The Southern Daily Echo have contacted me and will be running another story on this issue. I am meeting their journalist on site tomorrow morning.

In response to the Daily Echo’s enquiry today, the Council issued the following statement:

“Following a meeting between Southampton City Council Trading Standards, Public Protection and West Quay parking teams on Friday 27 March, the signage is currently being reviewed by West Quay Parking Services.”

It is helpful to have this publicly confirmed.

The Daily Echo have also asked whether anyone who believes they have been unfairly fined would be willing to share their experience for the article.

For anyone who would like to do so, the journalist is:

erin.rhodes@newsquest.co.uk

With very best wishes,

Councillor Jeremy Moulton

Conservative Councillor for Millbrook Ward

Nellymoser

With Trading Standards saying Britannia Parking signage is confusing it's not looking good for the BPA who audit Britannia's signage.

Coupon-mad

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81952517#Comment_81952517

Nope, it was in reply to your oft trotted out excuse for why your sector rinses people:

"Maybe they respect the landowners wishes,"

We all know that isn't true and that the tail wags the dog.

Interesting that you didn't deny any of the examples I gave of how the sector sets out to 'rape & pillage' sites.

MothballsWallet

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81952517#Comment_81952517

I don't think so - C-m is generally on topic - unlike your friends at the BPA, IPC, IAS and POPLA, who couldn't find a topic if it had a gigantic flourescent arrow pointed at it.