Parking stories in the News/media

Nellymoser

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3eqj5jnwlko

"I went in and of course you've got to use an app, so I couldn't pay because I've got an old Nokia phone, which is just annoying," said Nice, who lives in Bury St Edmunds.

"I got back in my [van] and went out, and then, blow me,  about a week later I get a ticket for £60, or £100 if I don't pay – I couldn't believe it.

The operator Napier Parking Ltd has been contacted by the BBC for comment.

Switcher_Sam

Regarding the article in the previous post, presumably the BBC now have received their comment from Napier and have accepted it at face value as the article now has a "correction":

Correction: An earlier
version of this article incorrectly claimed that this car park was
cashless and did not accept coins or cash. The BBC has been informed by
Napier Parking Ltd this is not the case. It said coins, contactless card
payments and payments through the RingGo app are accepted and clearly
advertised.

Coupon-mad

I wonder who to believe?

Either way, there can be no debate that he was only there 8 minutes and gained no amenity from the site and didn't park there, he left after grappling with an app he couldn't use.

Consideration periods at sites that are remotely monitored by camera and require an obligation (an action by the driver, such as paying or getting a ticket or a paper permit to display, or entering your VRM at a kiosk/screen) should be at least ten minutes minimum at all locations.

No site - and I include Airport drop off (pseudo 'toll') zones - should be allowed to be run using an app or phone (or 'pay later online') payments only because lots of people don't carry phones. And it digitally excludes older and poorer people.

Nellymoser

UPDATE:

https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/jubilee-pool-probe-launched-cornwall-11118494?int_source=amp_continue_reading&int_medium=amp&int_campaign=continue_reading_button#amp-readmore-target

PCN recipient Mr Roe, a non-practising solicitor told CornwallLive: "Giles Gould and/or Jubilee Pool has said in messages and publicly on Facebook, that their car park is 'legally compliant'.

"But it isn't. It's a scandal to be claiming that, when the pool and Parkingeye seem to have failed to even get the basics right in having a 'legally compliant' car park.

He added: "The pool and Parkingeye entered into their Service Agreement for the car park for three years from December 2023. Neither has bothered to obtain the necessary planning permissions or advertising consents.

"So that means that without legal authority (being planning permission and advertising signage) for the camera, Parkingeye has used the camera to capture car number plates and then used those to issue £100 parking charge notices.

"In the meantime, Jubilee Pool has been claiming to anyone who complains that their car park is 'legally compliant', which it clearly isn't, and appears under their Service Agreement to then take a cut of the £60/£100 parking charges that Parkingeye collect.

"It absolutely stinks."

Mr Roe believes hundreds of drivers over the years will have been caught out by the conflicting signage at St Anthony's car park when he believes it was not even legal to do so.

He added: "It's a scandal. In carrying on saying the car park is 'legally compliant' Giles Gould should resign. If people since December 2023 have been scammed out of £60/£100 on a car park site using images from a camera for which no planning permission has been gained, heads should roll at Jubilee Pool.

"A 'no win no fee' law firm could have a field day with this."

CornwallLive asked the Jubilee Pool charity trust and Mr Gould for a comment and to show us the planning and advertising consent paperwork for the pole-mounted ANPR cameras and signage at St Anthony's car park.

Mr Gould said he needed to confer with Parkingeye even though clause 3 of the service agreement between Jubilee Pool and the parking operator clearly puts the onus on the pool to seek the relevant planning consent.

yarpsnehpets

Fabulous work from Mr Roe.

Nellymoser

Certainly is and great reporting from CornwallLive.

1505grandad

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/london-cabbie-handed-parking-ticket-while-dropping-off-disabled-passenger/ar-AA2b2iVA?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=6a902d9e210d4f1ca2976de4acd68d3a&ei=120

"A black cab driver has been issued a parking ticket while dropping off a disabled passenger in London.

Gary Taylor was fined £60 after he stopped briefly to help an elderly woman with a cane to her door at 10.30 in the evening.

Despite appealing to the parking company, Parking Collection Services (PCS), telling them he was a licenced black cab driver and he was only stopping to let someone out, his claim was rejected.

The company said that, while it “appreciated” the fact he was a professional driver doing his job, “conditions of parking apply to all motorists that use this site”.

It said Mr Taylor had “parked” on a private road that serves a number of apartment blocks in the Brentford Lock area and that “being a taxi driver does not provide an exemption” to its terms and conditions, which were displayed on signs nearby.

Only after The Telegraph published this story did the company back down, telling Mr Taylor it was dropping the charge as a gesture of goodwill “after carefully considering the case”.

Ruth Cadbury, the Labour MP for Brentford and Isleworth, said she was “very concerned” to hear of “yet another private parking company acting in an overzealous and unfair manner against a taxi driver who was simply helping a passenger get home”.

“Cabs across London are a vital lifeline for so many of my constituents, especially those with limited mobility or additional needs,” she said.

“It is very disappointing that this private company has not shown any discretion nor common sense and I hope that they come to their senses.”

Steve McNamara, the general secretary of the Licensed Taxi Drivers’ Association, said private parking companies had begun to operate as though they were in the “Wild West” with a “licence to print money”."

FWIW - the PCS website boasts:-

"How have you obtained my details?

We are members of the British Parking Association (BPA) www.britishparking.co.uk

The BPA are an accredited trade association for the parking industry. We are authorised to request keeper details from DVLA. Please see the link. http://www.dft.gov.uk/dvla/data/parking.aspx

As a BPA member we are regularly audited by the BPA and DVLA to ensure compliance with their rules and regulations."

yarpsnehpets

Manchester Airport Data Security Incident - Update & FAQs

The data breach includes VRMs from members of the public who used their car parks.

Nellymoser

Concerns raised about how charge points operate alongside traditional car park restrictions. 

https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-16083923/Motorist-fined-nearly-270-electric-car-takes-11-minutes-long-charge.html

Mr Singh said: 'I am not denying there were signs saying there was a 60-minute maximum stay.

'My concern is that it was not clear whether that applied to someone actively using the EV charger.

'There was nothing on the charger saying that you had to disconnect within an hour, even if the charge was not complete.

'The problem is the disconnect between the parking signs and the charging-point information.

KFC said it had asked InstaVolt to amend the rules affecting the EV charge points so drivers could complete a charge without fear of receiving a parking charge. !!!!

Probably another one for the CMA as landowners, PPCs and companies eg. EV chargers, Parcel lockers, have not bothered to work together to look at how these additional services will operate alongside current car park restrictions BEFORE the installation and going 'live' commenced.

patient_dream

RE: THE ABOVE POST ….

But the British Parking Association (BPA), of which CEL is a member, said it was the motorist's responsibility to 'read the signage and understand any conditions that may apply'.

Isaac Occhipinti, of the BPA, said: 'It is important that drivers check for any parking restrictions before leaving their vehicle to charge, particularly outside normal operating hours.

The protection mob of the BPA speaks again talking about who is responsible ?

Charging a vehicle is NOT parking no more than stopping to fill up with petrol is.

Note that the sign makes no comment about the EV charger so who is responsible for that .. CEL or the BPA ? The consumer must understand the rules of the whole car park and the sign does not.

The BPA say they audit car parks, I doubt this given the sheer amount of signs that are rubbish

I also note on the sign that CEL has states that other costs and debt collection will be added if the charge is not paid? I would be more clear if they said "We apply the OSNER / BPA MONEY SCAM"