Anyway to establish when a parking fine was sent.?

As for the few minutes overstay argument, you should get at least 10 minutes grace period, it can be longer.

The PCN value is based on a deterrent value and the cost of enforcing the car park, cameras aren’t cheap to install and the DVLA and Post Office dont offer their services for free. Private PCN values have remaimed static since 2015.

The government is supposed to be bringing out a proper code of conduct but as usual have made a mess of it. Instead of getting on with it and taking out the bottom feeders who give the industry a bad name they’ve gone for cheap votes and tried to reduce the PCN value despite evidence submitted during the consultation and council’s input which all indicated it should stay the same or go up. They then fell foul of a judicial review which they blamed on the private parking companies despite it being their own fault for not following their own consultation guidelines. This was under Robert Jenrick so no surprise really.

Some of the companies are less than ethical but generally they provide an important contracted service with some safeguards to land owners who otherwise would have no way to control parking on their land. If people want to see a return to their vehicles being held to ransom then fine, personally I’d like to see the givernment get it’s act together and fairly regulate the industry but there seems to be little chance of that happening.

Go back to the days of cowboy clampers, pay to be released and then try and get the money back and I’d agree.

Scotland effectively banned clamping about 40 years ago.  It didn’t cause a mass surge in illegal parking.

But not nowadays.

Scotland still manages to operate car parks without the benefit of POFA to allow owners to identify the driver.

As I say, having been the ‘victim’ of parking thieves my opinion has changed…. if the public played by the rules, including not trying to get off ‘on a technicality’ then they’d all go broke in no time.

the thing that doesn’t make sense is many of these places have gone to quite a lot of expense to put in ANPR systems to catch the non compliant when they could have spend similar money on a barrier system which enforced compliance – without the potential for excess profits.

I think most people would accept that there is a need to pay (or time limits for free places) and there should be mechanisms to enforce it.  I think if you were designing a “fair” system overstaying a 2hr free car park by 10 minutes, a £1.50 per hour car park by 20 minutes, or a £20 per day car park be 20 hours would not all attract the same “penalty”.  A reasonable system would allow a driver to realise they have overstayed and proactively make a payment before any enforcement action has been taken (say in first 24 hours) probably at a higher rate than normal but far below the £60/100 usually charged.   It’s more expensive to overstay a free car park than to park on a double yellow line, or overstay a council parking meter and their enforcement costs are far higher (they need people to walk around).  It would not be at all difficult for a government, either in Scotland or England, to introduce a clear, fair set of rules and independently appoint a regulator to handle appeals.  With a standard and fair approach it wouldn’t seem unreasonable to hold keepers liable for their vehicles.

now I should say I recently used an FLS car park – and paid by ringo.  As it is a daily charge I got a reminder many hours after I had already left that my parking session was about to expire – only then did I realise that whilst faffing trying to get signal to pay I had inadvertently selected the wrong vehicle.  To my surprise Ringo has a mechanism to resolve this.  It was a bit convoluted and I might have paid £4 now rather than £2 but I have not got a penalty charge – so it is possible for parking providers to behave sensibly.

Was this in a Vets car park?

Let’s be clear here, I have zero liability for paying the fine as I’m based in Scotland. As far as the morality of not grassing up my skint partner and passing on her address to a grubby private parking organization when I have absolutely zero obligation to do so, I’m more than ok with that. As would 99.9 percent of the population I suspect.

Was this in a Vets car park?

As a mod it’s surprising you think it’s acceptable to come on here simply to take a dig, especially at someone else’s partner. Do you do that in real life, or simply from the safety of behind your keyboard?

Let’s be clear here, I have zero liability for paying the fine as I’m based in Scotland

Did the alleged parking incident occur in Scotland or England? If it’s England then it’ll be pursued under English law surely regardless of where you’re based? If it happened in Scotland then ignore. Although that Dundee woman caused problems with her court case, they’re not going to go after you for 1 ticket

It’s in Scotland.

Good post by Poly. I think the variable penalty for the transgression makes sense on paper but operationally is harder to do, and secondly as the court ruled, there is also a deterrent effect. Being able to top up an overstay makes sense; being able to not pay and then if you get caught pay the same top up doesn’t seem fair.

As far as the morality of not grassing up my skint partner and passing on her address to a grubby private parking organization when I have absolutely zero obligation to do so, I’m more than ok with that. As would 99.9 percent of the population I suspect.

Not judging your morals, just saying it is a moral question. Legally, you’re home and dry, well done.

However, I’d say less than 99.9% of the population would think it OK, and more so the “100-x%” of us that don’t feel it’s  OK to get away on technicalities are subsidising those that do.

You are correct on liability and think you’ve got a new loophole now you’ve discovered the 14 day rule loophole isn’t a loophole.

Let us know how you get on as genuinely intrigued on how sticking it to the man goes. Good luck.

As a mod it’s surprising you think it’s acceptable to come on here simply to take a dig

What does being a moderator have to do with acceptability?  Would it have been more acceptable if he wasn’t?

This sort of comment is why most of the moderation team remain anonymous.

What does being a moderator have to do with acceptability?

Don’t you have to pledge to uphold the honour of the Internet before coming a mod? Like a Hippocratic Oath, but for the Web?

Barriers are a terrible solution for car park management. They are very expensive to install and maintain. They often go wrong and when they do you often can’t get in and out of the car park. ANPR is a lot cheaper, more reliable and paid for by the abusers nit the land owner. Cameras only get installed if there is enough abuse to pay for them. If it breaks it just means ni PCNs.

Under payment isn’t a big thing and most paid car parks allow you pay for a top up. Most PCNs are for people who shouldn’t be there in the first place, people who don’t pay at all and people who overstay.

Variable penalties don’t make sense, there needs to be a deterrent, if it’s at a level people to consider ‘reasonable’ it wouldnt be a deterrent. Plus it costs the same to issue and manage a PCN regardless. Council’s are desperate to increase PCN rates, they can’t even start to cover the cost of enforcement hence the reason so few people get tickets for double yellows etc.

What we do need is a properly regulated and audited industry. The bigger companies are desperate for this as it will shut down all the small bottom feeder companies. But no this government couldn’t manage a p*ss up in a brewery.

Don’t you have to pledge to uphold the honour of the Internet before coming a mod? Like a Hippocratic Oath, but for the Web?

A hypocritic oath?

Variable penalties don’t make sense, there needs to be a deterrent, if it’s at a level people to consider ‘reasonable’ it wouldnt be a deterrent.

The whole Beavis vs Butthead test case aside, I wonder how many PCNs are issued because people screwed up rather than because they intentionally tried to park outside of the regulations?

I’ve had a number of parking tickets over the years, I can’t offhand think of one where I’d intentionally thought I could ‘get away with it,’ the charge could be a thousand pounds and it’d have changed nothing other than me being more inclined to fight it.

The most recent was on a non-motorway Services car park, I sat in the car, ate a sandwich and read a book whilst The Boy was visiting his dying gran in hospital.  I had no idea that there were any restrictions at all (which, yes, is on me), the only signage was a poxy little sign as you enter which I completely missed.  £60 to park for 20 minutes longer than I was allowed to, and not dissimilarly to the OP the “pay up within 14 days” notification letter arrived 13 days after the supposed date of issue.  I’m all for car park owners enforcing their parking lot with a ‘deterrent’ but that’s a blatant money-grubbing exercise on a half-empty free car park.

Being able to top up an overstay makes sense; being able to not pay and then if you get caught pay the same top up doesn’t seem fair.

no I was thinking more “pay in advance” (ie at the time) and it’s say £5, pay afterward but within 24 hrs it’s £10.  Pay after the write to you it’s £30 and if they have to chase you it’s £60.    You could scale that up or down too – I think my local car park is £0.50 for each 30 mins, but £100 penalty whether you are 30 minutes overstaying or stay 24 hrs. My local Tesco has anpr and a 2h limit but the fine is the same for staying 121 minutes or 24hrs.

Cougar it’s all a bit of a balancing act, land owners don’t want to pay for enforcement but without it they lose control of their car park. Think of the Aldi next to Turf Moor or the Asda next to the Etihad.

ANPR balances controlling the abuse with keeping enough abuse to pay for the systems. Need to see it as a bit of an idiot tax really, a significant number of all private car parks are now enforced so people need to remember to check. I think the galling thing is most of it is people making a genuine if avoidable mistake and these are often the people who pay up. The people who repeatedly offend get away with it because it costs a lot more to take people to court than the judgement is for.

What really needs tightening up iis enforcing the standards, whether that’s signage, appeal criteria etc. It’s all there in the industry code of practice but there are still far too many small companies taking the pass.

What really needs tightening up iis enforcing the standards, whether that’s signage, appeal criteria etc.

Exactly my point really.  I genuinely didn’t know there was a restriction, better signage would have meant that their parking was actually enforced because I wouldn’t have outstayed my welcome.  Charging me £60 isn’t a deterrent – well, it is in so far as I’ll know better next time I suppose – it’s punitive.

Think of the Aldi next to Turf Moor or the Asda next to the Etihad.

Is parking an issue whereby genuine supermarket customers otherwise couldn’t park due to football / event traffic?  I have no frame of reference here, sorry.  If so then yes, it needs enforcing of course.

Yes, Turf Moor is Burnley, the Aldi is rammed normally. If you notice Lidl and Aldi car parks are optimised to the siźe of the store, much smaller than the other supermarkets, all part of their cost controls. Football traffic would decimate the parking. Either is Manchester city and the Asda is literally next to the ground. The locals charge people to park on the pavements around there!

haven’t you just paid the £60 yet? What’s your time worth? Nobody really cares about ‘the principle’ you know.

I’m all for car park owners enforcing their parking lot with a ‘deterrent’ but that’s a blatant money-grubbing exercise on a half-empty free car park.

Signage is definitely an issue. One tiny sign as you go in shouldn’t be allowed. Not sure if it exists already but there should be a legal standard for signage not just a voluntary code policed by the an industry body.
However, would the car park have been half empty if it were not for the deterrent?

My local Tesco has anpr and a 2h limit but the fine is the same for staying 121 minutes or 24hrs

That’s because 2 hours is plenty to do a shop. Any longer and you are probably off doing something elsewhere using the car park because it’s free. Supermarkets need a steady turnover in spaces not people parking for hours at a time. I’m as guilty as everyone else for doing this by the way.