Printfriendly

Saturday, 16 January 2016

Independent Parking Committee operator code of practice breach condoned by the IAS

Imagine the situation. You get back to the car park, go to the machine, enter your registration and it tells you how much you owe for parking. This is because the ANPR knows what time you arrived in the car park. So far so good, and The Prankster has previously recommended such systems. However ParkWithEase has found a way to exploit motorists which has been upheld by the IAS.

The way they do it is this. Suppose at time x the motorist owes one amount, but this is the end of one charging period. One second later the motorist owes another amount. ParkWithEase are penalising motorists, even if they leave the car park straight away, saying they did not pay the correct amount.

The Prankster has heard from one motorist who checked the machine and fulfilled the terms and conditions in force at the time. They then left. ParkWithEase charged them £50 for straying 4 minutes into the next charging period, and this was upheld on appeal by the IAS.

Now, The Prankster thinks that 4 minutes is a reasonable grace period to allow for leaving a car park, and in fact the IPC Code of practice states:
Drivers should be allowed a sufficient amount of time to leave a site after a pre-paid or permitted period of parking has expired.
Four minutes would seem to be a reasonable period from the point of paying to get back to the car, strap the children in, and leave. (In fact, the British Parking Association mandates a 10 minute grace period) The IAS barista did not agree, and stated that as the driver had contractually agreed to the conditions they were liable to pay the £50.

The Prankster recommends that motorists avoid visiting the site, which is White Moss (near Rydal) in the Lake District, unless they are happy to risk paying £50 for parking even if the motorist fulfills the conditions at the time they attempt to pay for parking.



There are a large number of online complaints about this car park.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?430396-White-Moss-Car-Park-Parking-With-Ease-(NOT)-**Won-at-IAS**

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5328093

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2712690/Ticket-old-theyll-pay-How-ruthless-parking-cowboys-tell-wardens-exploit-vulnerable.html

http://forums.pepipoo.com/lofiversion/index.php/t100637.html

http://www.cwherald.com/a/archive/caught-out-by-complex-keypad-at-car-park.429767.html

http://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/ShowUserReviews-g186318-d187959-r329139664-Lake_District_National_Park-Lake_District_Cumbria_England.html#REVIEWS

The Prankster is not surprised.

Happy Parking

The Parking Prankster

Posted by at

15 comments:

  1. john carden16 January 2016 at 16:10

    The IPC code of practice might as well have been written in invisible ink, because ppc's frequently breach whatever is written in it, and the IPC do not enforce any such code, some ppc's do not even know the name of the code, calling it a code of conduct, when rejecting appeals, joke of an ATA

    ReplyDelete
  2. john carden16 January 2016 at 16:11

    This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Unknown16 January 2016 at 17:56

    This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Unknown16 January 2016 at 17:57

    Maybe this could all be avoided by the motorist having a watch, after all it's all they need.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ewan Hoosami17 January 2016 at 00:32

      Indeed. It's a shame it will never happen but I would love to see a situation where Lord Neuberger himself asks for some advice because he has been caught out by the wonderful parking, ahem, 'profession'. Someone could then point him in the direction of the best selling 'Parking Prankster guide to purchasing a reliable timepiece'. Megaschadenfreude.

      Delete
    2. Colin MacDonald17 January 2016 at 23:55

      Their watch will also have to act as a time machine, since I can't see any other way that it's possible to trick Friend Computer into letting you pay the amount that it'll eventually stick you up for.

      Delete
  5. Unknown17 January 2016 at 01:17

    Would Park with Ease be confident of winning the same argument before a judge in a court?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Parking Prankster17 January 2016 at 01:30

      Possibly they would, because Gladstone Solicitors try and encourage parking operators to take cases from the IAS to court along with their help. However, their confidence may be misplaced because according to cases reported to me Gladstones have proved to be massively incompetent and either lost cases due to mucking things up, or to the fact that judges take an opposite view to the IAS. Did I mention that Gladstones is run by Will Hurley and John Davies, the same people who own the IAS?

      Delete
  6. JayKay17 January 2016 at 02:19

    Driving round a carpark isn't parking

    ReplyDelete
  7. Unknown17 January 2016 at 06:32

    Ok care to define a prepaid period of parking. This is a post paid period of parking. whilst its a stupid system they dont breach the code by acting this way.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Parking Prankster17 January 2016 at 06:34

      Its also a permitted period of parking, so the code is still breached

      Delete
  8. Unknown18 January 2016 at 06:18

    I think this is one I would take my chances on in court? Civil Courts are based on probability? How likely would you be to chose to pay the incorrect amount ? The PPC's meter defined the payment, so any reasonable person would see that? I would also include consumer legislation in my defence. The customer has no control over the payment meter, they are paying what is requested? It is an unfair condition in favour of the service provider. It would be interesting to see how many have actually been taken to court? and did the PPC win?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Nick Wood4 April 2016 at 04:14

    So there I was ready to defend myself in court on Wednesday against a private parking company who wanted £182 from me for, they said, overstaying my allowed 20 mins by 2 mins 18 seconds, considerably less than the time it takes to drive in and out of their car park. They phoned this morning and offered to reduce this to £150. They phoned this afternoon to say they've cancelled the court proceedings. For a year I was bullied and threatened. Their notices and regulations are designed to confuse and entrap. Their '20 mins free parking' is designed to pull you into a situation where even if you're under the 20 mins you are almost bound to overstay. They deluge you with documents and e mails promising dire personal consequences to your credit rating etc etc if you don't pay the rapidly escalating charges - all nonsense. They rely on you giving in for a quiet life. Their court documents are designed to intimidate.
    Top tip if you're near Grasmere, need the loo, avoid the White Moss car park - Toilets available- 20 minutes free parking - or at least be very careful.
    If they are prepared to go to within a few days of the court before packing off and take the expense that entails I hate to think how much money they are taking off those who give in to their bullying.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. parkandgettakenforaride25 June 2016 at 02:58

      Was this Park with Ease? I just received court papers off them for a similar situation in the same car park.

      Delete
    2. Unknown9 August 2016 at 03:12

      Me too!! Just started my process with my appeal rejected by Alex @ park with ease!!
      Celia2@sky.com for helpful tips!!
      We never parked!? We stopped for less than 10 mins for me to be sick!! but according to their camera it must have taken 5 mins with car in motion NOT PARKED for us to enter - drive around for me to be sick! And leave!!

      Delete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)