IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including QR codes, number plates and reference numbers.
Is this fraud ? Opinion please
Options
Sirdan
Posts: 1,323 Forumite
Take a look at this extract form London Luton Airport's website. (Note they employ the PPC ACPOA as do several airports)
"An £80 penalty charge has been introduced at London Luton Airport for drivers who stop their vehicles to drop off or pick up passengers on the approach roads, roundabout, or bus lane leading up to the Airport terminal.
The penalty charge will be reduced to £40 if paid within 14 days. This charge will not benefit the Airport financially. It is intended to stop the practice of drivers picking up or setting down passengers in unauthorised areas, which poses a risk both to the safety of passengers and that of other road users, as well as causing congestion and disruption to traffic. The penalty charge will be strictly enforced with mobile CCTV cameras."
Is this an attempt at fraud :-
1) The term Penalty Charge is used .. but only councils can issue Penalty Charges not PPC's like APCOA>
2) It says " The penalty charge will be strictly enforced..."
More fraud ? What "enforcement powers" do APCOA and London Luton Airport have ...NONE !!
Isn't it time that someone with some legal authority took this on board and put a stop to PPC's the length and breadth of the land attempting this sort of fraud with it seems the consent of the landowners who employ them !!
"An £80 penalty charge has been introduced at London Luton Airport for drivers who stop their vehicles to drop off or pick up passengers on the approach roads, roundabout, or bus lane leading up to the Airport terminal.
The penalty charge will be reduced to £40 if paid within 14 days. This charge will not benefit the Airport financially. It is intended to stop the practice of drivers picking up or setting down passengers in unauthorised areas, which poses a risk both to the safety of passengers and that of other road users, as well as causing congestion and disruption to traffic. The penalty charge will be strictly enforced with mobile CCTV cameras."
Is this an attempt at fraud :-
1) The term Penalty Charge is used .. but only councils can issue Penalty Charges not PPC's like APCOA>
2) It says " The penalty charge will be strictly enforced..."
More fraud ? What "enforcement powers" do APCOA and London Luton Airport have ...NONE !!
Isn't it time that someone with some legal authority took this on board and put a stop to PPC's the length and breadth of the land attempting this sort of fraud with it seems the consent of the landowners who employ them !!
0
Comments
-
The problem is getting someone to act, the laws are there, but no one does jack about them! There is legislation there to stop them using threats, or statements they have no power to use, or no intention of taking.
How many times have we heard posters say I paid because I was "scared of what they said they would do". I don't actually think the terms they use are always there by "mistake". If they get 10 people paying because they think its a enforceable penalty, it will be worth them losing the 4 or 5 who know its cobblers!
I believe the threat of court action should only be allowed on a letter before action, and not on the first contact! In 99.9% off cases its an idle threat so should be barred from being used!0 -
The problem is getting someone to act, the laws are there, but no one does jack about them! There is legislation there to stop them using threats, or statements they have no power to use, or no intention of taking.
How many times have we heard posters say I paid because I was "scared of what they said they would do". I don't actually think the terms they use are always there by "mistake". If they get 10 people paying because they think its a enforceable penalty, it will be worth them losing the 4 or 5 who know its cobblers!
I believe the threat of court action should only be allowed on a letter before action, and not on the first contact! In 99.9% off cases its an idle threat so should be barred from being used!
Indeed no one seems to be able to do anything ..even when it is blatantly staring them in the face ..
Plenty of Police where this sign is but I suspect they don't even realise it is unlawful :-(
http://s1196.photobucket.com/albums/aa420/sirdan1/?action=view¤t=053.jpg0 -
Report it to "actionfraud" and see if you get any response.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 248K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards