Bradfield Road car park (Hillsborough) - charges and "fines"

[Penistone999 10]

cheers,i'm buzzing

 

so you should be . private parking companies are scum who`s only interest in trying to con motorists into paying scam invoices . I want to see every one of these cowboys go bankrupt and have all their assets seized .

[Justin Smith 10]

Am I <REMOVED> off !

 

We went for a celebratory meal for my lad`s third birthday to the Taste Of India. Our group was in four cars which, apparently, were in the car park for 2Hrs 15min. I have just had a letter from High View Parking trying to get £85 off me, because we were parked over 2Hrs, I suspect the our friends will also get the letters. This was on a Sunday evening and the car park was virtually empty for Gawd`s sake ! ! And it was only a poxy 15 minutes ! ! I`m even more annoyed because the only reason we were there that long is because the Taste of India (we`re regulars) were short staffed and the service was very slow.

 

I do not understand why the owners of the car park (who, one assumes, also own the shops and restaurants round there) are trying to put off potential custom for their tenants, the whole thing seems ridiculous to me. Should they not be easily contactable to cancel parking fines which are obviously unreasonable ?

 

Can I just check that it`s still the case that these threatening letters can just be ignored ?

Edited February 17, 2016 by nikki-red

[peak4 263]

 

Can I just check that it`s still the case that these threatening letters can just be ignored ?

 

Do not ignore the letters. Lots on the web about it; try Pepipoo, MSE, Parking Prankster.

Do ignore anything by Kirbyinfurness lad (or kirkbylad or any similar alias), as it would seem he has been a tad underhand with some of his customers.

Also do ignore anyone who tells you to ignore the PCN; it's not a fine by the way, rather a speculative invoice hoping you'll pay it.

Google is your friend on this topic, rather than this esteemed forum, as some of the stuff on here is distinctly dubious.

[Justin Smith 10]

Do not ignore the letters. Lots on the web about it; try Pepipoo, MSE, Parking Prankster.

Do ignore anything by Kirbyinfurness lad (or kirkbylad or any similar alias), as it would seem he has been a tad underhand with some of his customers.

Also do ignore anyone who tells you to ignore the PCN; it's not a fine by the way, rather a speculative invoice hoping you'll pay it.

Google is your friend on this topic, rather than this esteemed forum, as some of the stuff on here is distinctly dubious.

 

When you say do not ignore the letters what do you mean ? ! ? What should I do with them ?

[Cyclone 10]

You should appeal using the formal appeals process as the first step.

[Justin Smith 10]

Do not ignore the letters. Lots on the web about it; try Pepipoo, MSE, Parking Prankster.

Do ignore anything by Kirbyinfurness lad (or kirkbylad or any similar alias), as it would seem he has been a tad underhand with some of his customers.

Also do ignore anyone who tells you to ignore the PCN; it's not a fine by the way, rather a speculative invoice hoping you'll pay it.

Google is your friend on this topic, rather than this esteemed forum, as some of the stuff on here is distinctly dubious.

 

Thanks for that.

I will be appealing using a modified version of the appeals letter on Parking Cowboys website.

Does anyone know who owns Bradfield Rd car park ? And if it`s the same company who owns all the shops in that block (incl the Taste Of India) ? I think this may be relevant as one of the paragraphs in the appeals letter template talks about what loss has the car park owner or its tenants suffered. Obviously if the Taste of India is a tenant of the car park owner (i.e. pays them rents), we spend money with the Taste of India, and the car park was virtually empty, then they haven`t suffered any loss, quite the opposite.

[ricoblade 10]

Thanks for that.

I will be appealing using a modified version of the appeals letter on Parking Cowboys website.

Does anyone know who owns Bradfield Rd car park ? And if it`s the same company who owns all the shops in that block (incl the Taste Of India) ? I think this may be relevant as one of the paragraphs in the appeals letter template talks about what loss has the car park owner or its tenants suffered. Obviously if the Taste of India is a tenant of the car park owner (i.e. pays them rents), we spend money with the Taste of India, and the car park was virtually empty, then they haven`t suffered any loss, quite the opposite.

 

As others have said use such resources as pepipoo but a first good step would be to talk to the Taste of India to see if they can get it cancelled.

[Justin Smith 10]

so you should be . private parking companies are scum who`s only interest in trying to con motorists into paying scam invoices . I want to see every one of these cowboys go bankrupt and have all their assets seized .

 

Ironically, in view of the fact I`m very annoyed at this ticket I`ve had, I do think there`s a place for parking enforcement. The owners of the Bradfield Rd shops want shoppers to use that car park, that`s what it`s for. I`d have a bit less sympathy for someone being prosecuted if they, say, parked their car there all day and caught the tram into work or town or (even worse) Meadowhall ! But people who are actually using the shops and just overstay there time by a relatively small amount should obviously not be prosecuted and there should be an easy way for them to contact the site`s owners to prove they were using their tenants businesses and have the ticket cancelled. Furthermore, the cameras should be switched off after the shops shut, say 6.00PM.

In fact I was also threatened with a ticket at Hillsborough Leisure centre. Again I maintain I should never have had that ticket because I was actually using the leisure centre, and, in fact, they eventually cancelled it, but it was a load of hassle I could have done without. On the other hand, parking enforcement is required there because people who work in the vicinity were parking in the leisure centre car park so there was no where for those actually using the centre to park.

 

---------- Post added 17-02-2016 at 16:23 ----------

 

As others have said use such resources as pepipoo but a first good step would be to talk to the Taste of India to see if they can get it cancelled.

 

Good idea. Even if they can`t get it cancelled they can confirm the car park owner is also the owner of the shops.

 

---------- Post added 17-02-2016 at 21:27 ----------

 

The issue of ownership of the car park and associated shops on Bradfield road deepens.....

I`ve just come off the phone to the Taste of India, and they said that their landlord does not own the car park. In fact they said that the shops all round the car park are owned by more than one landlord ! They think the car park is owned by the landlord of the Farmfoods shop (amongst others).

 

As an aside, I examined the card receipt from the Taste of India and it was issued at 20.22, I can`t have taken more than 5 to 10 minute after paying the bill for us to leave the car park. Therefore the claimed time on the demand (21.05) is inaccurate and therefore their clock is unreliable, therefore the claim is unreliable and therefore void.

 

Lastly, there seems to be some question as to whether the time limit for the Bradfield Rd car park is two hours (it certainly used to be) or one and a half. It may have changed, does anyone know when ?

 

Basically I think the whole situation regarding parking demands on the Bradfield Rd car park is a disgrace. There`s no way they should be issuing demands for "fines" after 18.00 (6.00PM) because quite clearly there is no "loss" accruing to the landlord of the car park or its associated shops. If there is no definable loss can a prosecution for on payment actually succeed ?

Edited February 17, 2016 by Justin Smith

[peak4 263]

Justin, I think you're missing the point somewhat.

Pretty much the only way these private parking companies (PPCs) make money, is to offer to "manage" the car park on behalf of the landowner.

Almost all their income is from folks who transgress their rules, and are thus "fined" as a result. Most folks don't understand the real situation, so roll over and pay immediately.

Unless you can get the landowner to arrange for the PCN to be cancelled, then don't expect your appeal to the PPC to be successful. Otherwise, they would have no income.

Your chance of success come at the next stage when you lodge the formal appeal with POPLA.

On the bright side, this costs the PPC real money for each adjudication.

[Ms Macbeth 73]

In fact I was also threatened with a ticket at Hillsborough Leisure centre. Again I maintain I should never have had that ticket because I was actually using the leisure centre, and, in fact, they eventually cancelled it, but it was a load of hassle I could have done without. On the other hand, parking enforcement is required there because people who work in the vicinity were parking in the leisure centre car park so there was no where for those actually using the centre to park.

 

For information - anyone using the Leisure Centre can stay more than two hours. There is a facility to log one's car registration once through the turnstile. I noticed someone using it, otherwise I might have been caught out too, as it has never been mentioned when I register for a class. I always enter my registration now, just in case I'm there for more than two hours.

[phawley 10]

The time limit changed to 1&1/2hours when the new company took over.

[Justin Smith 10]

Justin, I think you're missing the point somewhat.

Pretty much the only way these private parking companies (PPCs) make money, is to offer to "manage" the car park on behalf of the landowner.

Almost all their income is from folks who transgress their rules, and are thus "fined" as a result. Most folks don't understand the real situation, so roll over and pay immediately.

Unless you can get the landowner to arrange for the PCN to be cancelled, then don't expect your appeal to the PPC to be successful. Otherwise, they would have no income.

Your chance of success come at the next stage when you lodge the formal appeal with POPLA.

On the bright side, this costs the PPC real money for each adjudication.

 

That`s just the thing P4, all the other tickets me or my wife have been issued with the owner of the land is obvious (Asda & Hillsborough Leisure Centre), and therefore it`s possible to ask the owner to cancel the ticket as you can prove you were actually a customer of the land`s owner (or their tenants) at the time. The situation with Bradfield Rd Car park is completely different, nobody seems to know who the owners of the car park are ! I was told the landlord of the Farmfoods shop owned the car park, but, on talking to member of staff (not the manager) she said it wasn`t the same owner.

I can`t help wondering if you`re correct P4, if the owner of the carpark has nothing whatsoever to do with any of the shops round there they may well be in it just for the money they can make from fines. If that`s the case that`s pretty bad, particularly if it`s a Sunday night with an empty bleedin` car park !

Having said the above, the clock used for issuing the ticket is wrong, and provably (plus the signs are not lit and it was at night) thus, as understand it I (we, there were 4 cars ! in our group) have strong grounds for appeal, which we shall be doing.

 

---------- Post added 18-02-2016 at 14:59 ----------

 

The time limit changed to 1&1/2hours when the new company took over.

 

I can confirm this, I checked it today ! Do you know when the time limit changed ? We thought it was still 2 hours, plus, as I`ve already stated, the it was dark and the signs were unlit ! When you say the new company, do you mean the parking enforcement company or the actual owner of the car park ?

What this needs is for the tenant of the local businesses lobby their landlords, one and a half hours is ridiculously short, particularly in the evening if you`re going out for a meal. The problem is, if the owner of the car park has nothing to do with any of the local businesses, if that`s the case there really isn`t much they can do. Which begs the question, why was the car park sold to such a person in the first place ? It seems exceptionally short sighted....... I assume when the development was first built the car park was actually owned by the main (or only ? ) landlord ?

Edited March 7, 2016 by Justin Smith