Beavis v Parking Eye procedural rules/reserved Judgement
Discussion
JustinP1 said:
Are you suggesting that leaving your car on someone else land with big signs about how much parking costs is not a positive enough action for people to take responsibility already?
Or that ticking a virtual box somewhere is actually the issue that would solve everything?
Im sure you know Im being pedantic,just find it sad how you etc want to add to a growing list of punitive "fines" thats daily creeping into daily life more and more.Or that ticking a virtual box somewhere is actually the issue that would solve everything?
Countdown said:
Sounds fine.
Could we have the full costs of the above process subsidised by Council taxpayers as well? The LA has the time and the money to do the above because it is using taxpayers money to prosecute people - small businesses don't. Companies like PE provide a much more cost-effective deterrent.
And AIUI no council has a "Let you off the first time" policy.
So what's your solution to dealing with the piss takers whilst not penalising the people who've made a small mistake, eg back 10 minutes late, one wheel on a white line etc.Could we have the full costs of the above process subsidised by Council taxpayers as well? The LA has the time and the money to do the above because it is using taxpayers money to prosecute people - small businesses don't. Companies like PE provide a much more cost-effective deterrent.
And AIUI no council has a "Let you off the first time" policy.
Councils used to have a small excess charge for minor infraction eg overstaying on a meter for a few minutes before the full fine issued. Maybe some still do? Probably went out with civilianised enforcement.
As for subsidy by council taxpayers, stop being silly. The firm operating the PE gets instructions from the landowner surely. Maybe nobody would take up the contract under those terms in which case have to think again.
But the purpose of the landowner is to keep the space clear not be prosecuting hundreds of people.plus not pissing off genuine customers. If someone qualifies as a piss taker then they deserve the attention imo.
FiF said:
So what's your solution to dealing with the piss takers whilst not penalising the people who've made a small mistake, eg back 10 minutes late, one wheel on a white line etc.
Perhaps we should differentiate between different type of p155takers - the ones that spoil my working day are the ones who park in spaces which have big red signs saying "PRIVATE - PARKING FOR XYZ STAFF ONLY". Do you accept that people who park here are expressing t
ttishness of the highest order? To clarify, there are no Hospitals or Fluffy Kitten Surgeries in the vicinity and there is ample barrier controlled Pay Car parkingFiF said:
Councils used to have a small excess charge for minor infraction eg overstaying on a meter for a few minutes before the full fine issued. Maybe some still do? Probably went out with civilianised enforcement.
No idea. However I have never found it difficult remembering what time my free parking expired and making sure I left before that time. It's a shame we have to make lots of allowances for people who can't take responsibility for themselves.FiF said:
As for subsidy by council taxpayers, stop being silly. The firm operating the PE gets instructions from the landowner surely. Maybe nobody would take up the contract under those terms in which case have to think again.
I'm not being silly. Please feel free to re-read my post. Councils employ teams of traffic wardens to manage car parking issues. Small companies can't. Councils have large in-house legal departments who have the time and the experience to prosecute offenders. Small companies don't. That is precisely why we will quite happily outsource to companies like PE. It's cheaper and much more efficient. [Actually this must be a first for PH - somebody suggesting that we adopt the methodology of a large Public sector organisation instead of the private sector).FiF said:
But the purpose of the landowner is to keep the space clear not be prosecuting hundreds of people.plus not pissing off genuine customers. If someone qualifies as a piss taker then they deserve the attention imo.
No. If landowners were pissing off genuine customers they would lose customers and their profits would fall. If people don't like firms that use PE then they should vote with their feet. The problem is freeloaders who use landowners space just to avoid paying for parking.Funkycoldribena said:
If they really bother you that much in your carpark (which Im sure you're exaggerating) just let their tyres down,why always resort to cash?As you keep saying, people will get the message.
Or alternatively the builders/joiners/decorators unloading their vans could accidentally damage it as they walk past with their ladders, angle grinders, and paint stripper?The reason they don't do that is because it's criminal damage.
Countdown said:
Or alternatively the builders/joiners/decorators unloading their vans could accidentally damage it as they walk past with their ladders, angle grinders, and paint stripper?
The reason they don't do that is because it's criminal damage.
Not quite comparable is it? Maybe man up a bit and sort the car park out yourself if its that precious to you.The reason they don't do that is because it's criminal damage.
Countdown said:
ill tempered stuff
Calm down slick.Reread. Where have I suggested you do it yourself. I even talked about outsourcing it just establishing the terms under which they operate, as I believe as landowner you are legally required to do.
If on your space there isn't the opportunity for someone to have made a simple mistake then it's straight to piss taker mode.
For the record as soon as you ranted about fluffy kitten surgeries I just filed you in the oiks to be ignored drawer. Bye.
Edited by FiF on Sunday 26th April 17:13
FiF said:
Calm down slick.
Reread. Where have I suggested you do it yourself. I even talked about outsourcing it just establishing the terms under which they operate, as I believe as landowner you are legally required to do.
If on your space there isn't the opportunity for someone to have made a simple mistake then it's straight to piss taker mode.
For the record as soon as you ranted about fluffy kitten surgeries I just filed you in the tts to be ignored drawer. Bye.
The reference to fluffy kittens was in response to those who kept using the hospital example when bleating about how it's all "sooooo unfair." If it offends then tough.Reread. Where have I suggested you do it yourself. I even talked about outsourcing it just establishing the terms under which they operate, as I believe as landowner you are legally required to do.
If on your space there isn't the opportunity for someone to have made a simple mistake then it's straight to piss taker mode.
For the record as soon as you ranted about fluffy kitten surgeries I just filed you in the t
ts to be ignored drawer. Bye. JustinP1 said:
Funkycoldribena said:
JustinP1 said:
We both know that's silly and pointless.
Besides, I actually got the IFC for the laptop over the internet. No ink signature, wax based family seal or vial of blood needed.
Same with the phone. No ink or numpty holding up paperwork needed.
Just a bit of responsibility for my own actions, and acceptance if I fk up, I've got no-one else to blame.
Im sure you had to tick a box.Maybe a booking system on the ppcs website then?Besides, I actually got the IFC for the laptop over the internet. No ink signature, wax based family seal or vial of blood needed.
Same with the phone. No ink or numpty holding up paperwork needed.
Just a bit of responsibility for my own actions, and acceptance if I f
k up, I've got no-one else to blame.Or that ticking a virtual box somewhere is actually the issue that would solve everything?
There was no lost to the park park (I'd paid for a ticket) yet they can charge an additional £85.
Dodgy bars in London used to operate a similar business model to fleece tourists.
The T&C's also gave them the right to impound my car (even if it had left the site).
I don't condone taking the piss, but that shouldn't give private car parks the right to fleece customers when they feel like it.
Incidentally can someone explain to me why local councils are seen as paragons of virtue when it comes down to operating car parks?
They have the right to fine you, instruct bailiffs etc without going to court, the fines far exceed the loss of your over staying in the car park, and of course many are operating cctv enforcement of on-street parking fining people who have stopped to ask for directions, or to assist old people that have tripped and fallen on the pavement etc.
Can those who are so anti parking enforcement on private land please post their addresses so the rest of us can come and park in your drives as and when we feel like it? Its no different, your drive is private property as are private car parks, or private land.
They have the right to fine you, instruct bailiffs etc without going to court, the fines far exceed the loss of your over staying in the car park, and of course many are operating cctv enforcement of on-street parking fining people who have stopped to ask for directions, or to assist old people that have tripped and fallen on the pavement etc.
Can those who are so anti parking enforcement on private land please post their addresses so the rest of us can come and park in your drives as and when we feel like it? Its no different, your drive is private property as are private car parks, or private land.
This is the issue - a case of extremes as amply demonstrated here. Perfect people who would never make a mistake or be 5" late back to their car justifying grossly disproportionate ('unconscionable') charges by commercial 100% profit driven companies and the other side hating anything and everything any parking operator does to manage the pi$$ takers and selfish parkers.
Not a peep of course about my suggestion of £1 penalty plus a £15 admin charge for any minor violation that causes no loss. And it seems its absolutely black and white and only fair that any commercial or dodgy company can assume an ability to rape your wallet if you contravene some small print regarding parking on their land - be you an octogenarian or a bit late back from your chemo as a lot of people had cancer that day. F delightful approach to life - but its all about the $$$ isnt it; bang to rights?
If people thought in more common sense terms the world will be better.
Not a peep of course about my suggestion of £1 penalty plus a £15 admin charge for any minor violation that causes no loss. And it seems its absolutely black and white and only fair that any commercial or dodgy company can assume an ability to rape your wallet if you contravene some small print regarding parking on their land - be you an octogenarian or a bit late back from your chemo as a lot of people had cancer that day. F delightful approach to life - but its all about the $$$ isnt it; bang to rights?
If people thought in more common sense terms the world will be better.
Chrisgr31 said:
Incidentally can someone explain to me why local councils are seen as paragons of virtue when it comes down to operating car parks?
They have the right to fine you, instruct bailiffs etc without going to court, the fines far exceed the loss of your over staying in the car park, and of course many are operating cctv enforcement of on-street parking fining people who have stopped to ask for directions, or to assist old people that have tripped and fallen on the pavement etc.
Can those who are so anti parking enforcement on private land please post their addresses so the rest of us can come and park in your drives as and when we feel like it? Its no different, your drive is private property as are private car parks, or private land.
Agree, but I think mitigation goes a lot further with the council (currently)...They have the right to fine you, instruct bailiffs etc without going to court, the fines far exceed the loss of your over staying in the car park, and of course many are operating cctv enforcement of on-street parking fining people who have stopped to ask for directions, or to assist old people that have tripped and fallen on the pavement etc.
Can those who are so anti parking enforcement on private land please post their addresses so the rest of us can come and park in your drives as and when we feel like it? Its no different, your drive is private property as are private car parks, or private land.
You are welcome to park on my drive...but if you stay 1" over your slot I will throw the book at you in a manner that is most unprecedented and most unreasonable. But they you agreed to that didn't you by parking on my drive...but didnt worry as you never intending to overstay or find that the pay and display machine doesn't take the 'old style' 10p's that you have in your pocket. And you had to dash as it was a job interview. And they kept you waiting. Your loss...my gain! He he.
Ken Figenus said:
Not a peep of course about my suggestion of £1 penalty plus a £15 admin charge for any minor violation that causes no loss.
Im fully against any penalty.I hate ppcs and their supporters because of this downward spiral of cash grabbing for any minor transgression especially as its not this giant problem that it's made out to be.But lets say the 16 quid charge was agreed to (not a chance mind)then all the ppcs would do is triple the amount of pettiness to grab three times the cash.Funkycoldribena said:
Im fully against any penalty.I hate ppcs and their supporters because of this downward spiral of cash grabbing for any minor transgression especially as its not this giant problem that it's made out to be.But lets say the 16 quid charge was agreed to (not a chance mind)then all the ppcs would do is triple the amount of pettiness to grab three times the cash.
I know mate but they have to have some way of tackling the pi$$ takers without taking the very pi$$ themselves - the land isn't free. Someone else needs to set their terms maybe - is that a compromise (and NO backhanders)!I've just read this thread from start to finish and am not sure I'm any more informed 
There seems to be a lot of support for companies fining drivers who park where they shouldn't or have no right to, which I can agree with, but there seems very little content mentioning bad practice from the ppc's (as in over zealous stuff rather than over priced fines).
Yes, I know they aren't fines really, but that's as good a word as any IMHO
I have never overstayed in a private car car without taking action to make sure the owner/ppc know why..............I've been in an A and E too like others, but always contact staff if treatment is delayed and they have ALWAYS organised a fine free solution with the ppc.
What does worry me a lot is that my car, like many others is too long to fit into many car park spaces and so it's impossible for me to park within the marked lines. I can park between marked lines to the sides but am longer than the bay itself. Although I can't do anything about that I still always worry that an over zealous comapny may decide I've flouted their rules and fine me.
Another chance to get a fine are when the car park rules say that the car park is for cars only and vans are not permitted. To help enforce ths rule a weight restriction of 1500kg is added to the car park rules. This makes my saloon too heavy to park there, along with lots of other cars
There seems to be a lot of support for companies fining drivers who park where they shouldn't or have no right to, which I can agree with, but there seems very little content mentioning bad practice from the ppc's (as in over zealous stuff rather than over priced fines).
Yes, I know they aren't fines really, but that's as good a word as any IMHO
I have never overstayed in a private car car without taking action to make sure the owner/ppc know why..............I've been in an A and E too like others, but always contact staff if treatment is delayed and they have ALWAYS organised a fine free solution with the ppc.
What does worry me a lot is that my car, like many others is too long to fit into many car park spaces and so it's impossible for me to park within the marked lines. I can park between marked lines to the sides but am longer than the bay itself. Although I can't do anything about that I still always worry that an over zealous comapny may decide I've flouted their rules and fine me.
Another chance to get a fine are when the car park rules say that the car park is for cars only and vans are not permitted. To help enforce ths rule a weight restriction of 1500kg is added to the car park rules. This makes my saloon too heavy to park there, along with lots of other cars
Ken Figenus said:
This is the issue - a case of extremes as amply demonstrated here. Perfect people who would never make a mistake or be 5" late back to their car justifying grossly disproportionate ('unconscionable') charges by commercial 100% profit driven companies and the other side hating anything and everything any parking operator does to manage the pi$$ takers and selfish parkers.
Did you not read my earlier post ? I'm not talking hospitals but small retail, cafes etc 50% of 2 hours is hardly 5 minutes.speedyguy said:
Terminator X said:
JustinP1 said:
The problem is there are a significant number of people who take the piss. It is those who have meant that the system is financially viable, been put in place, and unfortunately not allowed your wife the leniency she would otherwise have been given.
Do you really think that the majority are taking the piss rather than the system is set up to catch the majority who are simply a few minutes late and then can't be bothered to contest it?TX.
Ken Figenus said:
If people thought in more common sense terms the world will be better.
As quoted by many others with parking management problems if there weren't so many selfish feckers around it wouldn't be an issue Ken Figenus said:
This is the issue - a case of extremes as amply demonstrated here. Perfect people who would never make a mistake or be 5" late back to their car justifying grossly disproportionate ('unconscionable') charges by commercial 100% profit driven companies and the other side hating anything and everything any parking operator does to manage the pi$$ takers and selfish parkers.
Not a peep of course about my suggestion of £1 penalty plus a £15 admin charge for any minor violation that causes no loss. And it seems its absolutely black and white and only fair that any commercial or dodgy company can assume an ability to rape your wallet if you contravene some small print regarding parking on their land - be you an octogenarian or a bit late back from your chemo as a lot of people had cancer that day. F delightful approach to life - but its all about the $$$ isnt it; bang to rights?
If people thought in more common sense terms the world will be better.
Unless I am mistaken Parking Express generally rely on CCTV enforcement monitoring entrance and exit rather than on the parking within the space. To pick up an infringement for being over the lines etc would tend to mean manual enforcement I would say which of course a number of posters in the thread are keen on!Not a peep of course about my suggestion of £1 penalty plus a £15 admin charge for any minor violation that causes no loss. And it seems its absolutely black and white and only fair that any commercial or dodgy company can assume an ability to rape your wallet if you contravene some small print regarding parking on their land - be you an octogenarian or a bit late back from your chemo as a lot of people had cancer that day. F delightful approach to life - but its all about the $$$ isnt it; bang to rights?
If people thought in more common sense terms the world will be better.
Chrisgr31 said:
Unless I am mistaken Parking Express generally rely on CCTV enforcement monitoring entrance and exit rather than on the parking within the space. To pick up an infringement for being over the lines etc would tend to mean manual enforcement I would say which of course a number of posters in the thread are keen on!
Correct.The CCTV system only does the recording of Entry/Exit times and cross references these against the tickets purchased at the machine or permits for those registrations.
Any other 'offences' have to be entered into the system manually. At our place the office complex manager sometimes wanders around and notes registrations committing 'offences' and emails them to Parking Eye.
I have emailed Parking Eye myself with Reg numbers when I have got pissed off at someone being parked in one of our Reserved bays who isn't supposed to be there.
Chrisgr31 said:
V8 Fettler said:
There is something deeply cynical about taking tax money to build hospital car parks (PFI is eventually paid for by the tax payer) and then charge patients to use the same car parks and then extorting substantial sums from the same when they are delayed due to a medical process.
The solution? Manage the issue to the benefit of patients.
That is of course exactly what they are trying to do. They have parking controls to try and discourage people from parking on the hospital site whilst they are not at the hospital. The easiest and cheapest way to manage a car park is pay and display, its easy to use understood by drivers etc.The solution? Manage the issue to the benefit of patients.
In my experience if using hospital car parks there has always been a procedure for those that are delayed by medical issues to ensure that they are not fined etc, although I have always had to ask.
The simple reality is that we would not be in this position if people didn't take the piss, and it is not until you manage a piece of land that can be used as parking that you become aware of how big an issue it is.
You only need to read the threads about people parking in my space, blocking me in etc to realise what an issue parking is.
Retail should be about enticing people to park and then to shop. Many town centres are dying because the retail sector and local authorities can't get their heads around the concept of providing generally available, easy, no-cost parking for shoppers. No high street shop is going to get my money if there is any possibility that I have to pay an additional charge to park. Every pound is a prisoner!
V8 Fettler said:
Several accounts on this thread where hospital parking appears to be managed to the detriment of the patients. Control of hospital parking probably needs a different approach to preventing people from parking in someone's office car park.
That's the point exactly. There isn't a one solution fits all situations. The operation needs to be tailored and there may well be a site where it's simply not viable practically or financially to use anpr and it needs an alternative approach. Unfortunately all that costs, as does the loss of the space to the piss takers, whereas handing over an area to an enforcer costs nothing to the landowner. Problem is that the business model of PE relies on what we're seeing, i.e. pursuit of profits above all else, entrapment and so on.
The mistake that's been made here is in the legislation when clamping was banned was in not setting out a permissible scale of charges.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff