Parking Code evidence - pictures of signs with £50, £60 or £70 PCN and no £ DRA fee on the sign

Castle

Jenni_D said:

How many "consultations" are needed? This is getting ridiculous.

And here is a previous one-from March 2015-calling for evidence! 
Title (publishing.service.gov.uk)

kryten3000

Coupon-mad said:

ParkingEye offices, Chorley.

NO RESTRICTIONS.

NO SIGNS.

Someone with a £150k McLaren parks it across 3 bays.  Wonder what ParkingEye thinks is a credible deterrent?

Wasn't this taken the day of the unfortunate ParkingEye office fire?  Perhaps the driver was in a hurry for some reason?

KeithP

kryten3000 said:

Coupon-mad said:

ParkingEye offices, Chorley.

NO RESTRICTIONS.

NO SIGNS.

Someone with a £150k McLaren parks it across 3 bays.  Wonder what ParkingEye thinks is a credible deterrent?

Wasn't this taken the day of the unfortunate ParkingEye office fire?  Perhaps the driver was in a hurry for some reason?

Ahhh... mitigating circumstances... that's ok then.  

kryten3000

Another MIlton Keynes location, this is Sainsbury's in Shenley Church End.  3 Hours max stay, £60 charge.


General view of the car park on a Saturday afternoon.  Yellow signs are the parking terms.  Disabled bays clearly marked.


Entrance sign showing 3 hour maximum stay and indicating details on other signage within the car park


Privacy notice which is on the "click and collect" signpost pole visible in the previous picture.


Main terms and conditions sign - 3 hours, no return within 1 hour, park in marked bays, BB holders only in marked bays plus "please inform us if you wish to park longer than the maximum time indicated, valid badge must be displayed".  

Interestingly the sign says "please observe the following conditions to avoid a parking charge notice of £60".  I'm not sure that wording constitutes a contractual agreement as it is a request not an order.


Additional Blue Badge/Parent & Child spaces sign pointing out that the car park is patrolled.  £60 charge with the same wording "please observe the following conditiions..."

kryten3000

BP Petrol Station at Breakspear Way, Hemel Hempstead HP2 4TZ (as requested by Coupon Mad).

General view from the entrance.  There is parking to the left of the building.

Here you will find half a dozen spaces and one of three or four signs:

The only other sign is next to the air and water machine on the far side of the forecourt



Here is a close up of the sign which threatens £100 charge but is otherwise inadequate.

B789

KeithP said:

kryten3000 said:

Coupon-mad said:

ParkingEye offices, Chorley.

NO RESTRICTIONS.

NO SIGNS.

Someone with a £150k McLaren parks it across 3 bays.  Wonder what ParkingEye thinks is a credible deterrent?

Wasn't this taken the day of the unfortunate ParkingEye office fire?  Perhaps the driver was in a hurry for some reason?

Ahhh... mitigating circumstances... that's ok then.  

Not if it went to POPLA!!!

Fruitcake

We need to be creative with our responses and use photos as evidence to supply answers to more than one specific question. For example, signs that are poorly maintained or unreadable need to be read across into answering the lie that the £100 charge and the fake add on charges are a deterrent, not just the questions about the (lack of) cost of maintaining signs because maintenance isn't carried out.

For example, this is another of my responses to the DLUHC's call for evidence.

Q 4.1 The deterrent effect is frequently cited as a reason to maintain existing parking charge and debt recovery fee levels. The general argument here suggests that existing parking charge limits provide a deterrent against non-compliant parking, with existing debt recovery fee limits providing an additional deterrent for those who do receive charges to pay those charges before it progresses to the debt recovery stage.

 A deterrent only works if said deterrent is made known. Hiding signs high up on walls or poles such that they cannot be read, burying the salient terms and conditions in massive walls of text, using tiny font or font size less prominent to be less obvious than inviting terms such as, Free Parking, failing to illuminate signs, or have them facing away from the direction of traffic, or allowing them to become sun-bleached, damaged, vandalised, or failing to cut back foliage will all benefit parking operators because motorists will know nothing about a deterrent and fall foul of the operator’s hidden rules.

The following are examples where details of the deterrent appear to have been deliberately hidden to mislead the motorist. The additional so called deterrent of the fake add on debt recovery charges that are not actually incurred by parking operators due to debt recovery agents offering a no win - no fee service are also deliberately hidden, assuming they even exist on the signs. In all cases where the charges (deterrent) are hidden gives a lie to the parking industry's statement that they are needed and effective.

Worle mainline GWR station, Somerset. APCOA parking operator. The terms and conditions (deterrent) are so small as to be deliberately unreadable even at one car length in clear daylight, and hidden at shin level in amongst the train operating company's signage.

Smart Parking Ltd sign in a covered car park, Doubletree Hotel, Bristol city centre. The terms and conditions (deterrent) are so small as to be deliberately unreadable even at only a distance of one parking space width.

Here the operator, Civil Enforcement Ltd has placed a row of signs with unreadable terms and conditions (the deterrent) outside the boundary of the private land at the Holiday Inn hotel, Taunton, on lamp posts set on the edge of a public road. It is reasonable to assume that a motorist would believe these signs related to public parking on said road and were nothing to do with hotel parking, since they are positioned outside the hotel car park. In my opinion this is a nothing more than a cynical attempt to mislead the motorist and hide the deterrent.

A typical UKPC sign at the Angel Place shopping precinct, Bridgwater. Once again the terms and conditions (the deterrent) is buried in tiny font that cannot be read, even from the end of a parking bay/car length.

Holiday Inn Express, Filton, South Gloucestershire. Operator, ParkMaven Ltd. The terms and conditions (the deterrent) are set high up on poles and unreadable even from only 2 metres away. Again this is another cynical attempt in my opinion to hide the deterrent.

GWR mainline station, Parkway, South Gloucester, with services to London, Bristol/the South West, as well as Cardiff and West Wales. Operator APCOA. Sign at the very edge of the car park as far away as it is possible to get and still be on Railway Land. Yet again the charges (deterrent) are unreadable from less than a car length away.

NCC1701-A

Sainsburys, Elm Park, Essex, free parking except disabled bays where there is a £60 parking charge.

NCC1701-A

B&Q, Harold Wood, Essex, 3 hours free parking, option to pay for longer or £70 PPC parking charge.

pinkelephant12

I'm working my way through my response to the Call for Evidence. 

Section 1 has a lot of questions for the parking industry about the cost of signage. 

I wondered whether anyone had any information about who pays for the signage in most car parks i.e. whether it is the parking company or whether they pass the costs on to the landowner?   Possibly different in residential cases.

I know that in my case (residential car park), residents were charged for the cost of the signage and installation, although I don't know whether it was subsidised in any way. 

Is this normal in residential developments?