Parking stories in the News/media

Coupon-mad

Yes but we DON'T WANT THEM TO.

The very last thing the CMA should be doing is telling PPC World to add the double recovery fake 'fee' onto signs.

And if people shout too loud for that, it could cement this blatant double recovery forever.

Bazarius

Good point !

Bazarius

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81964313#Comment_81964313

Good point !

Kaizen2024

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81964313#Comment_81964313

So you concede that if an operator quotes both the £100 and the £70 on their sign; £170 is recoverable in law.

Nellymoser

Community raises concerns after multiple visitors received £100 parking charge for leaving Wick Parade on foot.

https://www.sussexexpress.co.uk/news/people/outcry-over-new-car-parking-rules-at-littlehampton-shopping-parade-6576515

Following a recent meeting with residents and businesses owners Alison Griffiths MP wrote on Facebook

"Under a new parking regime, operated by One Parking Solution Ltd, visitors to Wick Parade will receive a fine for £100 if they leave the immediate area of Wick Parade to go to nearby shops. This surveillance and monitoring is deeply intrusive, and far from well-communicated.

“I have been collecting evidence in my survey to fight this. Today we reached over 1,000 sign-ups....“I’ll be using this evidence to push for changes to the charges, as well as for legislation at a national level."

Shopkeepers have been raising awareness sharing information in the car park, on social media and local radio to educate drivers about the rules, hoping to prevent further parking charges and confusion.

One said: "We are all working very hard in our business to build our reputations and encourage new customers into Wick, this is so damaging to us as a community and I know that it is causing us a lot of worry and stress.”

The MHCLG say private parking companies benefit communities well not according to this community.

One Parking Solution has been approached for comment...😶 seems OPS didn't want to comment or say how their service 'benefits this community'.

Coupon-mad

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81965174#Comment_81965174

"So you concede that if an operator quotes both the £100 and the £70 on their sign; £170 is recoverable in law."

Not quite, because they would both have to pass the Beavis tests for not being penal, prominence, legitimate interest, etc. Parking related charges are not all recoverable and not automatically allowed just because a sign was up.

Easy for people like me to argue that double recovery of the same heads of costs counted twice, is unlawful. However, less easy for Joe Public. You and I both know the reality. You don't need me to 'concede' anything.

In fact, the Beavis case (when correctly considered) kills the added £70.

Nellymoser

@Kaizen2024 can you explain to me why YOU think judges don't award the claimant the £70 debt fee.

Car1980

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81964313#Comment_81964313

I was thinking of the angle that a mass refund of the fake seventy pounds would be on the cards, as with the AA.

And that in itself would cement it as unrecoverable, whatever "improvements" the made signage-wise.

Coupon-mad

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81965334#Comment_81965334

But that would cement £170 as potentially recoverable.

Better to complain to the CMA that HHJ Moloney's original Cambridge judgment in Beavis confirms that the Supreme court authority means the PCN already covers all pre-action letters ('enforcement costs') and this industry has been extorting that head of cost twice for over a decade.

That sort of complaint would also cause a potential for mass refunds.

The LAST thing we want is the CMA saying: "we've told PPC World to put the fake fees on the signs (nobody told us this is a fake fee, and double recovery)".

Kaizen2024

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81965304#Comment_81965304

Because many operators don’t have their ducks in a row… I do.

Plus you only know what you know, this forum see’s such a tiny proportion of the true situation.