REVIVING THE PRIVATE PARKING BILL

Coupon-mad

Kaizen2024 said:

Tons of the articles will be complaints that have no merit i.e ‘poor me’ stories. 

Really? You sound anti-consumer.

Kaizen2024

Not at all, just anti-those that disrespect the wishes of a landowner then complain when they incur the consequences.

patient_dream

"Who the hell does the BPA think they are. "

It's clear ...... the BPA is run by the very dodgy legals to suck money from the public
As usual they spout rubbish

Coupon-mad

Kaizen2024 said:

Not at all, just anti-those that disrespect the wishes of a landowner then complain when they incur the consequences.

That's always trotted out nobody believes that the parking 'industry' motley crew mainly act in the interests of landowners.

Interesting idea but don't make us laugh!

If that was true, your industry would have set yourselves up fairly, would be paid by landowners as a service industry (only where needed, not where you've blagged your way into inappropriate & unnecessary sites due to operating 'free').

And if your 'parking management' worked, it would have almost eradicated the problem by now, not exploded to £2 billion+ profits.

Are you including in your accusations of 'consequences' all the PCNs incurred in seconds by use of covert CCTV? Great trick. Hide a CCTV camera high on a building wall then secretly film all vehicles, with no consideration period and no fair chance to accept any terms.

You reckon that's fair & enforceable?!

h2g2

Kaizen2024 said:

Not at all, just anti-those that disrespect the wishes of a landowner then complain when they incur the consequences.

Just FYI I have PPC operating on land I own. 

I didn't ask for them to be there.  They were appointed by a stranger to the land who are supposed to look after the common areas of the estate (which does not include any parking).

I showed them my title deeds to the land and they insist I take it up their their principle. The IPC say they audited the site and don't want to get involved.  Their principle says they don't cancel short of a court order requiring them to.

If parking companies are there to serve the landowner's wishes, can you tell my I'm having to pay over £3500 in legal fees now to evict them from my land, even after they've seen proof I'm the legal owner? 

Or do you maybe think they only care about exploiting as much profit as possible from whatever poor sap they can on the vaguest excuse and trust that most people don't have the will or expertise to fight them?

Kaizen2024

Are you including in your accusations of 'consequences' all the PCNs incurred in seconds by use of covert CCTV? Great trick. Hide a CCTV camera high on a building wall then secretly film all vehicles, with no consideration period and no fair chance to accept any terms.

You reckon that's fair & enforceable?!

I don’t have any first hand experience with using CCTV as the primary method of detection (only supporting evidence), but in the few cases I have read here, the driver has not been considering anything i.e did not spend the time reading signage, just present on someone else’s land without their permission.

Kaizen2024

h2g2 said:

Kaizen2024 said:

Not at all, just anti-those that disrespect the wishes of a landowner then complain when they incur the consequences.

Just FYI I have PPC operating on land I own. 

I didn't ask for them to be there.  They were appointed by a stranger to the land who are supposed to look after the common areas of the estate (which does not include any parking).

I showed them my title deeds to the land and they insist I take it up their their principle. The IPC say they audited the site and don't want to get involved.  Their principle says they don't cancel short of a court order requiring them to.

If parking companies are there to serve the landowner's wishes, can you tell my I'm having to pay over £3500 in legal fees now to evict them from my land, even after they've seen proof I'm the legal owner? 

Or do you maybe think they only care about exploiting as much profit as possible from whatever poor sap they can on the vaguest excuse and trust that most people don't have the will or expertise to fight them?

I know nothing about your circumstances, but I am aware that some people claim to own land when in fact they lease the land.

Sometimes, not necessarily in your case, leaseholders are required to follows rules that are stipulated by the freeholder/management company; often after a vote amongst leaseholders.

Personally, I would have no issue removing your allocated bay from a permit scheme; but I would have sign(s) saying your bay was not subject to enforcement so you do not benefit from the deterrent against unauthorised parking that the scheme provides. 

You may soon change your mind though if you then can’t park in your own bay due to the unauthorised parking that gave cause to introduce the scheme.

Coupon-mad

Kaizen2024 said:

Are you including in your accusations of 'consequences' all the PCNs incurred in seconds by use of covert CCTV? Great trick. Hide a CCTV camera high on a building wall then secretly film all vehicles, with no consideration period and no fair chance to accept any terms.

You reckon that's fair & enforceable?!

I don’t have any first hand experience with using CCTV as the primary method of detection (only supporting evidence), but in the few cases I have read here, the driver has not been considering anything i.e did not spend the time reading signage, just present on someone else’s land without their permission.

Within 20 seconds?!

pustit

Kaizen2024 said:

h2g2 said:

Kaizen2024 said:

Not at all, just anti-those that disrespect the wishes of a landowner then complain when they incur the consequences.

Just FYI I have PPC operating on land I own. 

I didn't ask for them to be there.  They were appointed by a stranger to the land who are supposed to look after the common areas of the estate (which does not include any parking).

I showed them my title deeds to the land and they insist I take it up their their principle. The IPC say they audited the site and don't want to get involved.  Their principle says they don't cancel short of a court order requiring them to.

If parking companies are there to serve the landowner's wishes, can you tell my I'm having to pay over £3500 in legal fees now to evict them from my land, even after they've seen proof I'm the legal owner? 

Or do you maybe think they only care about exploiting as much profit as possible from whatever poor sap they can on the vaguest excuse and trust that most people don't have the will or expertise to fight them?

I know nothing about your circumstances, but I am aware that some people claim to own land when in fact they lease the land.

Sometimes, not necessarily in your case, leaseholders are required to follows rules that are stipulated by the freeholder/management company; often after a vote amongst leaseholders.

Personally, I would have no issue removing your allocated bay from a permit scheme; but I would have sign(s) saying your bay was not subject to enforcement so you do not benefit from the deterrent against unauthorised parking that the scheme provides. 

You may soon change your mind though if you then can’t park in your own bay due to the unauthorised parking that gave cause to introduce the scheme.

Your stooges would deliberately park an old banger in the space.
Just like they leave a car over the lines of a bay then catch out the cars in adjacent spaces which then have to also park out of line.

pustit

Kaizen2024 said:

Are you including in your accusations of 'consequences' all the PCNs incurred in seconds by use of covert CCTV? Great trick. Hide a CCTV camera high on a building wall then secretly film all vehicles, with no consideration period and no fair chance to accept any terms.

You reckon that's fair & enforceable?!

I don’t have any first hand experience with using CCTV as the primary method of detection (only supporting evidence), but in the few cases I have read here, the driver has not been considering anything i.e did not spend the time reading signage, just present on someone else’s land without their permission.

Landlords have the backing of the law of trespass.
A parking company has no such power and, far from being a "change for the better", they are making things worse since they are ruining the landlords' reputations.