I have no issue if I had oversteped the mark with a conciderable amount of time but 17 mins is not a lot is it? I admit i was using the carpark to go swimming but I could have done that and gone home and not even gone in the shop and I wouldnt have gone over the time it was only becuase I was actually in the damn shop that I went over the time. I have agreed with the wife to ride it out and see what happens.
Parking Fine.
- Thread starter Slade2
- Start date
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
You're the one talking carp - I'm hardly going to accept hearsay and conjecture on a forum am I?
How about this - I can run a mile in 3m45s. It must be true as I've posted it on a forum.
Irrelevant. A speeding FPN is a punitive fine issued by an organisation with the authority to issue fines. A parking charge is an invoice issued by a company with no authority whatsoever. They are completely unrelated.
And neither is the person caught out by their underhanded tactics.
I'd imagine if they were getting ~£150 clamping release fee every time, they wouldn't be that bothered about you not paying a £2-3 parking fee XD
It's not a fine, it's a charge
Haha, yes, my bad
It is most relevant, a fine may be different to a charge but they have similar costs in their implementation, and a £30 charge is in no way excessive.
What is underhanded about sending somebody a bill for parking somewhere they shouldn't, it acts [or should act] as a deterrent to stop others doing it and them doing it again.
------
We used to use a company called TCP to look after our private car park however in the end we gave up with them as people were not being deterred (due to the ignore it and **** on other people advice like in this thread).
So we found a much better method, no not clamping, when people entered our car park past the big bilingual "private no parking unless authorized" sign we would leave them a note asking them not to do it again. The next time they did it we would slip some cash to the ****** on the camp-site across town to trash their car
word soon spread not to park there, justice for the win.We used to use a company called TCP to look after our private car park however in the end we gave up with them as people were not being deterred (due to the ignore it and **** on other people advice like in this thread).
So we found a much better method, no not clamping, when people entered our car park past the big bilingual "private no parking unless authorized" sign we would leave them a note asking them not to do it again. The next time they did it we would slip some cash to the ****** on the camp-site across town to trash their car
So you're aggrieved by people who (perfectly legally) ignore a parking charge, but are quite happy to condone criminal damage?
It's as relevant as how much you are charged for a service. The ONLY link between them is that they both relate to motoring.
It's underhanded because in the majority of cases the parking conditions, and/or charges aren't clearly stated.
------
We used to use a company called TCP to look after our private car park however in the end we gave up with them as people were not being deterred (due to the ignore it and **** on other people advice like in this thread).
So we found a much better method, no not clamping, when people entered our car park past the big bilingual "private no parking unless authorized" sign we would leave them a note asking them not to do it again.
The next time they did it we would slip some cash to the ****** on the camp-site across town to trash their car
A) There's a difference between a private car park where members of the public shouldn't be parking at all, and a public car park, where someone may overstay for a few minutes.
B) So in your opinion criminal damage is more acceptable than taking up a space in an otherwise almost unoccupied free car park for slightly longer than an arbitrary length of time?
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
So we found a much better method, no not clamping, when people entered our car park past the big bilingual "private no parking unless authorized" sign we would leave them a note asking them not to do it again. The next time they did it we would slip some cash to the ****** on the camp-site across town to trash their car
If your company weren't such cheap skates they'd buy a controlled barrier so only authorized people could get in.
I used to work for B&Q and some of the car parks they own were being used by people who were not shopping at the store so B&Q used a parking management company who set up ANPR cameras and timed people coming in and out. If the cars went over the 2 hours (clearly stated on lots of signs that 2 hours is the limit) then the parking management company would automatically issue the "invoice" for the amount stated on the sign as a penalty for going over the alloted time. So, as you can see it is actually the store that owns the car park and not a "car park company". Because of the nature of B&Q's business people are very often in store for more than 2 hours if they are getting a kitchen designed so if the owner of the car gets a parking penalty notice then the store would just contact the "parking management company" to cancel any penalty for that car. Because I worked from B&Q's head office and would visit lots of stores across the UK my registration plate was registered with the parking management company so i never received any penalty notices.
Now, I am pretty sure that B&Q pay the parking management company for this service and any money the management company gets is a bonus. But if the OP was to go to the owner of the car park (I think in this case it was Asda) by going into the store and just saying he was shopping at the store with his children and it took longer than 2 hours (you can say you ate in the cafe or even in the car as the kids were hungry so that took longer and you only went 17 mins over the 2 hrs). Asda will definately contact the car park management company and tell them to cancel the penalty (just don't mention you went swimming
).I think people are being a bit harsh on the parking management company here as all they are doing is providing the service that Asda asked them to provide.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
So if you paid me to murder someone and I did, you aren't to blame? Exterme example but the same logic.
These parking management companies deliberately design these invoices to mimic Fixed penalty Notices and use wording that whilst technically not illegal is ambiguous at best concerning your obligation to pay.
They are no more morally sound than those companies that provide novelty IDs to under 18s which just so happen to look remarkably similar to well known genuine ID cards.
Neither is technically acting illegally, but they are certainly going against the spirit of law.
I can be sympathetic when you get a store on a main road, and there is limited spaces available but a lot of these companies manage the out-of-town stores with huge car parks that rarely get full even at the busiest of times. In those cases the shop that hired the company will be making far more money for offering ease of parking than they'll lose from the odd person taking advantage of free parking at their expense.
That's like saying women who dress hot deserve to be raped. Or you should be allowed to steal from people who leave their windows open. You shouldn't have to secure the hell out of the property to stop trespassers, especially if they know full well their not allowed to park there.
B) So in your opinion criminal damage is more acceptable than taking up a space in an otherwise almost unoccupied free car park for slightly longer than an arbitrary length of time?
No, imo not driving past a massive sign that tells you you are not allowed to park there then parking anyway is more acceptable than taking up a space in an otherwise almost unoccupied private car park, and people who take the **** deserve what happens to them, its called karma.
Last edited:
That event chain is ended, two wrongs making a right and all. They went out of their way to hurt/inconvenience/etc us, we returned the favour, /fin
In my opinion, the best way around this is to have a system where customers pay when they return to their cars, and then have a certain amount of time to leave.
Already even in Exeter the main car parks are adopting this system, and it works well.
Already even in Exeter the main car parks are adopting this system, and it works well.
That event chain is ended, two wrongs making a right and all. They went out of their way to hurt/inconvenience/etc us, we returned the favour, /fin
That event chain is ended, two wrongs making a right and all. They went out of their way to hurt/inconvenience/etc us, we returned the favour, /fin
Firstly, that's hardly proportional and secondly, I think you'll find that three rights make a left.
Firstly, that's hardly proportional and secondly, I think you'll find that three rights make a left.
Proportional no but if they are intentionally going to go out of their way to cause trouble for us and laugh when asked to refrain they deserve what they get and it actually worked very well, it set an example and now nobody parks in our company car park unless they don't know the area (in which case the note for first time offenders is sufficient).
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
You still haven't explained why you don't just invest in a barrier.
Deffo ignore it.
I got one in ASDA last May after I'd just spent £256 on shopping instore. I was 9 mins over because the monkey on the checkout couldn't grasp the use of a chip 'n' pin machine.
I ended up with a 'penalty charge' and threw it in the bin, I then had a strongly worded reminder which went to the same place and I've heard nothing since.
I got one in ASDA last May after I'd just spent £256 on shopping instore. I was 9 mins over because the monkey on the checkout couldn't grasp the use of a chip 'n' pin machine.
I ended up with a 'penalty charge' and threw it in the bin, I then had a strongly worded reminder which went to the same place and I've heard nothing since.
Actually I did, basically its because we should not have too, its a big expense we shouldn't have to fork out for just to defend ourselves against deliberately inconsiderate people. Its like telling women to hire bodyguards or else its their fault if they get raped.
Its like telling a women to hire bodyguards... if shes travelling through say south africa alone. While in an ideal world you shouldn't have to spend time/money on barriers the reality is something different.