Printfriendly

Monday, 28 November 2016

AS Parking discontinue another case

This pepipoo thread discloses that AS Parking have discontinued yet another claim.
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=107019

The vehicle was parked in a spot where it had parked before. However, new parking signs had been erected. These were not visible in the dark.

In this type of case The Prankster considers that no contract would be in place by performance, and so no charge would be payable. It seems someone at AS Parking has belatedly come to the same conclusion.

AS Parking do not discontinue all claims - there are 6 due to be heard in Truro tomorrow (29/11/2016)

Happy Parking

The Parking Prankster


17 comments:

  1. Thanks PP. They had incorrect particulars from the start, and despite me highlighting the fact to them back in July, Gladstones ignored this fact and carried on with their conveyor belt. The photos would have completely embarrassed them in court, they were out of date for NTK and basically had nothing correct whatsoever. In a small way I am disappointed to not have had my day in court.
    I have thought about claiming costs but was informed by the lady on the phone at Truro that any email or letter I wrote would not reach the Judge without an application fee.
    I think we will just put this one down to a victory for the Pepipoo and MSE communities, and yourself.
    Thanks for your guidance.

    ReplyDelete
  2. AS Parking, you've been Gladstoned ;)

    ReplyDelete
  3. They won ALL of yesterdays hearings, and ALL of last weeks hearings.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Presumably you can now afford to buy some tickets with sticky backs then, instead of relying on making your income from upside-down tickets?

      Delete
    2. I would be interested to know how many of those were default judgements, and how many were poorly defended.

      Delete
  4. It may interest you to know that 70% of all tickets manufactured in the UK are now of the non-adhesive variety.

    Some machine manufacturers advise against their use, whilst other insist that they are not used warranty wise.

    It is no difficult task to take responsibility for your actions and quickly check that the ticket is displayed after locking the vehicle.

    If you knocked over your pint in a bar, would you blame the bar for not providing the means to prevent the spillage such as a sticky base to the glass? I think not…

    Also you may not be aware, but A S Parking offers the driver the opportunity to pay an admin fee of £20 for a face down ticket (when appealed in a timely fashion)… which is more than fair considering that they have incurred costs due to the drivers negligence.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Do they also offer to pay £20 when their negligence costs money for others, as was the case here?

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    3. A S Parking would have won hands down had the POC been completed correctly, therefore the driver got off lightly...

      BTW I believe that AS received payment for this PCN in any case, it just did not come from the driver.

      Delete
    4. Really? Who paid it? The only people who I can think of who might be liable are Wee Willy Hurley and Bouncer Kev. Perhaps you could provide some justification for this claim.

      And the driver did not get off lightly. They had their time wasted by an unprofessional PPC (is there any other kind?) who cannot even be bothered to put up proper signage, and their equally unprofessional solicitors. The poor POC is simply evidence that AS Parking and Gladstones are trying to run a sausage factory claims process, and not to try to properly manage parking in the best interests of their clients. No visible signs = no contract.

      Delete
    5. Devils Advocate, I am glad you agree that you are advocating for the 'devil', aka AS Parking.

      Your analogy of spilling a pint of beer in a pub and failing to display a ticket face up in a car park is frankly ridiculous. If the Barman supplied me a pint of beer in a flimsy paper cup, filled it to the brim and then fined me £100 for spilling it, then yes, I would blame the bar, even if they proclaimed that 70% of all cups are made of flimsy paper. I would suggest that the bar invests in the correct equipment to mitigate the problem.

      If, as a business, you find that you have a lot of 'customers' reporting a problem with your systems, then you fix your systems. You don't use it as a source of income.

      So you know, 100% of printers on sale in the UK will print on sticky labels. If you decide to fit the cheapest printers that don't print on sticky labels in your machines, then that is your problem, not ours.

      It is your job to mitigate any problems with your systems, not to create and profit from them.

      Delete
  5. Devils advocate do you have any further details of the cases they won yesterday

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. http://www.cornwalllive.com/diabetic-who-overstayed-in-as-parking-car-park-at-perranporth-by-5-minutes-told-to-pay-200-by-court/story-29942877-detail/story.html#KmwXMSFQBdsPfVLr.01

      Delete
    2. Mr McAnus said: "It is a common condition (Diabetes) and we don't want to open the flood gates and offer a get out of jail free card every time someone with a medical condition is issued with a charge." Mr McAnus also suggested Mr Hughes should have carried out the blood sugar test inside his vehicle."

      Sorry, but AS Parking, owned by Company Director and Ex Bouncer Kevin McAnus, or "Vin" as he likes to be known, represents everything that is wrong with private parking in this country.

      Delete
    3. This was much more the defendant losing than the claimant winning. The defendant did not comply with court rules to submit evidence 14 days prior to the hearing. Instead he rolls up with a Dr's note on the day.

      Reading between the lines, the outcome might well have been different if that note had been forwarded to the court 14 days previous.

      Delete
    4. Or indeed if Messrs Pranky Bargepole and Wilkie had been instructed from the off. So many victims, so little time :(

      Delete
  6. I have a disabled parking permit issued by Cornwall Council as of 20/12/2016. As you are probably aware, these permits are not sent to ourselves, instead the information is sent to AS PARKING OFFICERS hand-held devices.

    On the evening of 4/01/2017 with in minutes, (literally less than five mins), of parking my car in Looe Harbour Carpark I received a PCN for "not showing a valid ticket or permit for inspection". The time on the PCN states 19:35 - 19:45 I was standing in front of the cash machine opposite the carpark at 19:40, while my disabled wife was getting out if the car.
    She did nit see a parking Officer, neither did my adult son who was in the carpark reading the requirements for parking, not realising we had the permit.

    As-parking's online appeal cannot find the details of the PCN when I input the PCN number and our car reg, and their info@as-parking.co.uk doesnt seem to be working either as my emakks keep bouncing. Ive sent a snail mail appeal and awaiting reply.

    Ive checked with Cornwall Council who gave confirmed my permit is valid and active and I shouldn't have received the PCN.

    My research shows this sort of thing is common with this company, is this correct?

    ReplyDelete