Should I, she, or we pay this private companies parking fine?

[cougie uk]

The principal is private businesses motivated solely by profit acting as quasi police/enforcement officers.

Shouldn't they be motivated by profit ?

 

[Pale Rider]

Accy would wise to concede the 30 minutes - the evidence is there - so what he didn't see or did see is in the same category as the jacket he was wearing - wholly irrelevant.

Shouldn't they be motivated by profit ?

Can you not see the undesirability of a fine issuing company being motivated solely by profit?

 

[Accy cyclist]

Don't forget to keep your story straight, Accy, when you answer Ming's question. It will be good practice when you go before the District Judge.

Clear to see, but not easy to read.

 

[winjim]

The principal is private businesses motivated solely by profit acting as quasi police/enforcement officers.

I had you down as rather in favour of private businesses motivated by profit, exploiting opportunities. They're providing a service, namely parking, and charging for the provision of that service. Now you may object to them imitating the identities of certain agencies with slightly more statutory authority, and that could be considered dishonest depending on the extent to which they are doing it, but if you're going to go down the copycat branding route then it's worth bearing in mind that the car park in question was outside a branch of Lidl.


Edit: You pick people up on minor misunderstandings of the court system but refer to the parking company as a 'fine issuing company'. It's not.

 

[Mo1959]

And your last thread was about....? Yes, i don't think you've ever started one. Probably because not much happens in your life.

Too busy out cycling as this is...........yep, a cycling forum!

 

[Pale Rider]

I had you down as rather in favour of private businesses motivated by profit, exploiting opportunities. They're providing a service, namely parking, and charging for the provision of that service. Now you may object to them imitating the identities of certain agencies with slightly more statutory authority, and that could be considered dishonest depending on the extent to which they are doing it, but if you're going to go down the copycat branding route then it's worth bearing in mind that the car park in question was outside a branch of Lidl.

I'm in favour of companies - and individuals - who earn an honest living.

There is a great deal of copycat branding going on here.

The first think Accy reveives from the company is a Parking Charge Notice, which quite by chance, carries the same initials as the legitimate Penalty Charge Notice.

Subsequently, it's referred to as 'the PCN', which is the same language used in legitimate tickets.

If you get a paper version stuck on your windscreen, it is yellow and black with cross hatching around the border - all but identical to a legitimate notice.

I've already mentioned the private companies have been warned for using documents clearly made to look like a county court summons.

The various letters you will receive are all designed to look 'official'.

It's like any scam, it depends heavily on persuading the mark to believe things that are simply not true.

The buildings surrounding the car park, and what's written on the front of them, are entirely irrelevant.

 

[alicat]

Clear to see, but not easy to read.

So, go on, tell us what you did see on the notice.

 

[winjim]

I'm in favour of companies - and individuals - who earn an honest living.

There is a great deal of copycat branding going on here.

The first think Accy reveives from the company is a Parking Charge Notice, which quite by chance, carries the same initials as the legitimate Penalty Charge Notice.

Subsequently, it's referred to as 'the PCN', which is the same language used in legitimate tickets.

If you get a paper version stuck on your windscreen, it is yellow and black with cross hatching around the border - all but identical to a legitimate notice.

I've already mentioned the private companies have been warned for using documents clearly made to look like a county court summons.

The various letters you will receive are all designed to look 'official'.

It's like any scam, it depends heavily on persuading the mark to believe things that are simply not true.

The buildings surrounding the car park, and what's written on the front of them, are entirely irrelevant.

Er, yeah. It was mainly a joke about Lidl and copycat branding TBH.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

The principal is private businesses motivated solely by profit acting as quasi police/enforcement officers.

I'm not sure how else a private business is meant to stay in business if it's frowned on to make a profit.

Accy accessed private property with conditions attached to that access. No different from conditions placed on customers to a cinema or a shopping centre; if you don't like the conditions, don't use the facility.

 

[Pale Rider]

I'm not sure how else a private business is meant to stay in business if it's frowned on to make a profit.

If you can't see a problem with a profit motivated company issuing parking tickets there's no point in me labouring the point.

 

[winjim]

I happened to be in a privately managed car park this very morning so I thought I'd check out the sign.

Profiteering, or ensuring fair access to limited parking facilities for patients who may require it?

Note the big typeface, then the littler one, then the small print. It is a bit tiny and does lack contrast. It could be clearer although the main message above it is pretty obvious. I'm also not a fan of the 'PCN' initials or other copycat branding on parking charges. They should be a bit more upfront.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

If you can't see a problem with a profit motivated company issuing parking tickets there's no point in me labouring the point.

How do you suggest a private company controls access to, or proper use of, a facility on its private property?

 

[Ming the Merciless]

How do you suggest a private company controls access to, or proper use of, a facility on its private property?

Automatic tweed detecting machine guns

 

[Pale Rider]

I happened to be in a privately managed car park this very morning so I thought I'd check out the sign.

View attachment 605689

Profiteering, or ensuring fair access to limited parking facilities for patients who may require it?

Note the big typeface, then the littler one, then the small print. It is a bit tiny and does lack contrast. It could be clearer although the main message above it is pretty obvious. I'm also not a fan of the 'PCN' initials or other copycat branding on parking charges. They should be a bit more upfront.

The couple of NHS sites I visit have parking attendants and cameras which at least gives you a fighting chance to ask someone what the crack is.

I'm fairly certain most hospital sites say the ticket/fine income goes towards hospital funds, or at least a proportion of it, which is more palatable.

There is pressure on parking space at NHS sites, but no such pressure exists in Accy's case or in the case of my last ticket.

Which is not an excuse to ignore the rules, but should be taken into account when deciding on an appropriate penalty.

The parking companies know their only court option is a summons claiming damages.

They also know it is very difficult to establish any damages in cases such as mine and Accy's.

How do you suggest a private company controls access to, or proper use of, a facility on its private property?

As mentioned by another poster, they could install barriers, pay and display machines, and heaven forbid, employ a couple of people to manage the job.

Few companies do that because it cuts into profits.

Much better to stick up a few signs and ANPR cameras and wait for the (automated) money to roll in.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

Much better to [...] wait for the (automated) money to roll in.

Or not.